/ l 3! 



? LIBRARY OF CONGRESS.? 
# — . # 

[SMITHSONIAN DEPOSIT.] 

CM t\ 



# 

I UNITED STATES OF A'METIICA. \ , 







INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP; 



OR, THE 



tyhxtml anir permanent (%ratfn* 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 



REY. SAMUEL GREGG. 



EDITED BY REV. D. W. CLARK, D. D. 



And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according 
to the promise.— Galatians m, 29. 



^#'°^A 



dtnrinnatt: ^~ 

PUBLISHED BY SWORMSTEDT & POE, 

FOR THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, AT THE WESTERN BOOK 
CONCERN, CORNER OF MAIN AND EIGHTH STREETS. 



R. P. THOMPSON, PRINTER. 

1853. 



.Ca 1 ' 









Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1853, 

BY SWORMSTEDT & POE, 

■ i 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the District of Ohio. 



y m 



Tbe Library 

ot Cong k ess 



^ASHiNQTOM 



PREFACE. 



In sending this little volume abroad, custom re- 
quires that the reading public should be apprised 
of the circumstances that caused it to be written, 
and of the objects contemplated by the author in 
its publication, as well as of the character and con- 
tents of the book. And what is merely customary 
in other cases, seems very appropriate and highly 
important in this. The author is unknown to the 
literary world, and must, therefore, depend not upon 
an established and eminent character, but upon the 
intrinsic merits of his work, and the importance of 
the subject, to gain for it an extensive perusal. 
"Good wine needs no bush," said an eminent au- 
thoress, when asked for a preface, "and ba^l wine is 
made worse by apologies." We will, therefore, con- 
tent ourselves with a plain and brief statement of 
facts. Soon after entering upon the work of the 
ministry of the Methodist Episcopal Church, now 
more than twenty years past, our attention was spe- 
cially directed to the subject of infant baptism, by 

3 



4 PREFACE. 

finding in the Church many persons opposed to the 
baptism of children, and occasionally persons dis- 
satisfied with their own baptism in infancy. And 
this diversity of opinion and practice among us is, 
and has been, in most cases, owing to a want of 
correct information on this particular subject. And 
this defect is not the fault of our people, for the 
means of gaining information suited to their partic- 
ular wants has not been within their reach. A few 
tracts, sermons, and treatises, of very limited circu- 
lation, confined mostly to the abstract question of 
baptism, constituted our entire Church literature on 
this subject, except what was found in large and 
costly volumes, to which the majority of our people 
could not have access. True, they have their 
Bibles to read, containing all the doctrines of the 
Gospel. But it is also true that Christians, gener- 
ally, instead of making up their minds independ- 
ently, depend much upon the pulpit and the press 
for an exposition of the doctrines contained, and the 
practices enjoined in the sacred Scriptures. And 
it is also true, that anti-pedobaptists of every de- 
nomination are constantly engaged, with all the 
means within their reach, and with all the power 
and ingenuity of argument they possess, in bring- 
ing the practice of infant baptism into disrepute. 



PREFACE. 5 

And by Methodist ministers preaching, writing, and 
publishing but little in its favor, treating it as a 
subject of minor importance, the people are, in 
many instances, misled, greatly to their injury in 
this matter. And if the bare question, whether 
infants were to be baptized, was all that is at stake 
in this conflict, we might with less danger yield the 
ground to our opponents. But one error usually 
drags after it many others; and one duty neglected 
usually prepares the way for the neglect of many 
more. There are a great many important Scriptural 
truths and Christian duties connected with the sub- 
ject of infant baptism, which either stand or fall 
with it, as the reader will see by reading the follow- 
ing pages. A correct and thorough delineation of 
all the duties which the Bible imposes upon Chris- 
tian parents in particular, and the ministry and 
Church in general, in connection with the baptism 
of their infant children, is the great desideratum of 
the Church and of the world at the present day, 
and especially of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
How far the present work approximates to the ac- 
complishment of this demand, the intelligent reader 
must, after reading the work, determine. Such an 
object can not be attained by one, nor even many 
partial attempts. Effort after effort will be neces- 



6 PREFACE. 

sary, each gathering from the former all that had 
an important bearing in that direction, and gather- 
ing by patient investigation new and important facts 
and arguments till the work is made perfect. In 
this way we have been employed now more than 
twenty years. The first treatise we recollect to 
have read, was one published by Rev. C. Elliott, 
D. D., now editor of the Western Christian Advo- 
cate, to whose critical inspection this work has been 
submitted, and with whose approval it is now pub- 
lished. We soon after read another, by Rev. E. 
House, to which we would here acknowledge our 
indebtedness. All the writings of Dr. Clarke, and 
of Eev. R. Watson, touching this subject, have 
been carefully perused. But to none of these are 
we indebted more than to the Rev. F. G-. Hibbard,' 
whose truly-learned and able work on " Infant Bap- 
tism" has been several years before the public. It 
is impossible now to tell how much we have drawn 
from any of the above sources, as when we read 
them we sought to make their arguments our own, 
and to add to, and to improve upon them so far as 
it was within our power. Much, however, that will 
here appear as original matter, has been in this way 
obtained from others. Several years of our min- 
istry have been spent in portions of our work where 



PREFACE. 7 

the peculiar doctrines of Mr. A. Campbell; an emi- 
nent anti-pedobaptist, were exerting a popular and 
controlling influence. And believing that the cause 
of truth demanded it, we commenced a course of 
reading and of investigation, embracing all the 
points of dispute between them and us, especially 
relating to infants. We became convinced that 
pedobaptists, as a general thing, did not place the 
argument upon its true basis. The baptism of 
infants grows out of the relation which, by Divine 
appointment, they are made to sustain to the Church 
of Jesus Christ through all time; which relation 
secures to them numerous other privileges and 
blessings closely connected with their baptism. 
Taking this broad and comprehensive view of the 
subject, we were enabled successfully to defend the 
right of infants to Christian baptism. For our own 
improvement, we commenced arranging in a system- 
atic form the arguments and facts which had thus 
accumulated upon our hands, and reducing them to 
writing, till our manuscript had grown to its present 
form. This work has been performed at intervals 
extending through several years, amid the perplex- 
ities and labors of the itinerant ministry, and most 
of it without the least expectation that it would 
ever be seen by any but the author's own eye. 



O PREFACE. 

These facts are liere stated; first; as an apology 
for defects in the style and literary character of the 
work ; which will meet the eye of the critical reader; 
second; as an excuse for any failures that may be 
detected in giving due credit to those authors to 
whom we confess ourselves much indebted for the 
general matter contained in the work. We will 
here only add; that after submitting our manuscript 
to the inspection of several of the most competent 
judges; who have unanimously recommended its 
publication; we have finally determined to send it 
forth with earnest prayer to the "God of the patri- 
archs/' and the "Kedeemer of the world/' to make 
it a lasting blessing to all who may favor it with an 
attentive perusal. And if any person better quali- 
fied for the task will take up this subject; and bring 
out a better argument; and clearer delineation of 
Scriptural facts and Christian duties; he will not 
only be welcome to any assistance he may derive 
from this work; but shall also be entitled to the 
thanks and patronage of the Church. 

SAMUEL GREGG. 



CONTENTS 



I art jFtzst.' 



SECTION I. 

Different opinions concerning the Abrahamic Covenant — its incipient 
developments and its unity considered page 13 

SECTION n. 

The Covenant as finally developed with Abraham, and explained by 

St. Paul 30 

section m. 

The permanent character of the Abrahamic Covenant considered.. 46 

SECTION IV. 

The difference between the Abrahamic Covenant and the Ceremonial 

Law of Moses 57 

SECTION Y. 
The Church of Jesus Christ was organized in the family of Abra- 
ham, AND FOUNDED UPON THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT — HAS BEEN PERPETU- 
ATED, AND WILL BE FOREVER, CONSTITUTING THE TRUE SEED OF ABRA- 
HAM 69 

SECTION VI. 

THE PERPETUITY OF THE CHURCH ORGANIZED IN THE FAMILY OF ABRAHAM 
AS FORETOLD BY THE HOLY PROPHETS 79 

SECTION VII. 

What Christ, at his coming, was to do to the Church of the Patri- 
archs and Prophets which himself had organized in the family of 

Abraham 93 

SECTION VIII. 

The unity of the Church of Christ under the Jewish and Christian 
Dispensations 1° 3 



10 CONTENTS. 

SECTION IX. 

Inconsistencies of those that dent the identity of the Church under 

the Jewish and Christian Dispensations Page 122 



)axi £je.cjou&. 



SECTION I. 
Mr. Campbell's views of Circumcision corrected, and it proven to be 
the rite of initiation into the church of god 131 

SECTION II. 
Circumcision was a "Token" of a Covenant Relation with God, a 
"Sign" of Inward Purity, and a "Seal of the Righteousness of 
Faith " 146 

SECTION III. 

Proselyte Baptism and the Baptism of John considered 154 

SECTION IT. 
Circumcision was discontinued, and the Baptism which had accompa- 
nied it was improved and substituted as the rite of Initiation, etc., 
by the authority of Jesus Christ 162 

SECTION V. 
Christian Baptism, like Circumcision, is a " Token " of a Covenant re- 
lation with God, a "Sign" of Inward Purity, and a "Seal of the 
Righteousness of Eaith" <. 176 



lari ©jti&« 



SECTION I. 
The Moral Character of Little Children considered 193 

section n. 

The Infant Children of Believing Parents have the right perma- 
nently SECURED TO THEM OF MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHURCH OF GOD BY 
THE RECEPTION OF ITS INDUCTING ORDINANCE 204 

/ 



CONTENTS. 11 

SECTION m. 
The Savior of the world did not disfranchise Children of their 
Membership in his Church, but established it Page 214 

SECTION IV. 
The Commission given by Christ to his Apostles did not prohibit but 
provided for the Membership and Baptism of Infants 226 

SECTION V. 

How St. Peter understood and practiced the Apostles' commission on 

THE DAT OF PENTECOST 251 

SECTION VI. 

St. Paul baptized Believers and their Households 263 

SECTION vn. 

The Apostles recognized Children as sustaining to God and the 
Church a relation which implies Membership and Baptism 2S2 

section vin. 

Testimony of the immediate Successors of the Apostles 301 

SECTION IX. 
Historical argument continued 328 

SECTION X. 
Objections to Infant Baptism and Membership considered 345 

SECTION XL 
Address to Christian Parents in behalf of their Children 360 



INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 
Hart fiui; 

THE COVENANT MADE WITH ABRAHAM WAS CHIEFLY SPIR- 
ITUAL AND PERMANENT, CONTAINING THE TRUE CONSTITU- 
TION OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, AND EMBRACING ALL EVAN- 
GELICAL BELIEVERS, AND THEIR INFANT OFFSPRING AS THE 
"SEED OF ABRAHAM." 



SECTION I. 

DIFFERENT OPINIONS CONCERNING THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT — ITS 
INCIPIENT DEVELOPMENTS AND ITS UNITY CONSIDERED. 

The relation which the venerable patriarch Abra- 
ham sustained to the entire Church of God is a 
subject of the highest interest to all who claim to 
be in any wise connected with that Church, down to 
the end of the world. Abraham stands pre-eminent 
among all the holy men whose history stands re- 
corded in the Old Testament Scriptures; and, save 
Jesus Christ, he has no superior in the New Testa- 
ment. Dignified as a man, " strong in faith "■ as a 
Christian, and ardent in his devotion to the true 
God, he was selected by infinite and unerring Wis- 
dom as a fit model of Christian character, and 
placed at the head of his Church, and constituted 
the "father of the faithful." 

18 



14 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

This relation was fixed irrevocably in an everlast- 
ing covenant, which we propose examining, in all its 
various provisions, in the following pages, for the 
purpose of ascertaining what privileges are there 
permanently secured to the infant offspring of be- 
lievers in Christ. 

Looking at this ancient document from different 
points of the compass, with different shades of de- 
nominational prejudice, has led good men to take 
very dissimilar views of its permanency of char- 
acter, and of the spiritual bearing of its contents; 
but these differences all converge into two gen- 
eral classes, called pedobaptists and anti-pedobaptists. 
This division, however, is not exactly marked by 
denominational lines, there being many persons, both 
in pedo and in anti-pedobaptist Churches, who do 
not perfectly harmonize with their respective denom- 
inational views on this particular subject. 

As we intend most sincerely, and to the best of 
our ability, to advocate the pedohaptist side of this 
general question, it may here be proper to give the 
opinions of the opposite party as made public by 
their most prominent writers. The following are 
the views of the Rev. Alexander Campbell, founder 
of the sect called Disciples, or Campbellites : 

" Allow me, then, to give a brief sketch of the 
whole scheme of the Abrahamic institution. When 
God called Abraham, he gave him two promises of 
an essentially-different import and character. The 
first was personal and familiar; the second spiritual 
and universal. In other words, the first had respect 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 15 

to Abraham and his natural descendants according 
to the flesh ; the latter had respect to the Messiah 
and all his people. Two covenants, sometimes 
called two Testaments, Old and New, and two 
schemes of Divine government and special provi- 
dence are founded on these two promises 

The first is developed in the fifteenth chapter of 
Genesis. It is a covenant concerning the inherit- 
ance of Canaan. Some time after these two prom- 
ises, given to Abraham while yet in Chaldea, when 
he was in the land of Canaan, at Moreh, the Lord 
appeared to him and promised him that land. 
Some years after, on a certain occasion, Abraham 
asked the Lord, Whereby shall I know [be assured] 
that I shall inherit this land? The Lord com- 
manded him to prepare a splendid sacrifice of all 
clean birds and quadrupeds; and at even the Lord 
met with him at the altar, and while a burning 
lamp passed between the severed animals, the Lord 
revealed the fortunes of his family for the next 
four hundred years, and made a covenant with him, 
securing to him and his fleshly seed the whole land 
from the borders of the Nile to the Euphrates. . . . 
But the time drawing nigh when the promised son 
by Sarah, the free woman and wife proper of Abra- 
ham, should be born, in order that this issue by 
Sarah might be contradistinguished from that by 
Hagar, God was pleased to command Abraham to 
prepare for another covenant. This next covenant, 
growing out of the first promise, is made especially 
for the sake of ascertaining, by a fleshly mark, the 



16 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

natural offspring of Abraham, and guaranteeing to 
them the parental blessings conveyed to Abraham 
by the covenant concerning the inheritance, and 
also as to the time of its institution, one year before 
the birth of Isaac. It occasioned a remarkable dif- 
ference between Ishmael and Isaac, though sons of 
the same parent — the former being the son of his 
uncircumcision, the latter of his circumcision, 
though both circumcised themselves, Ishmael in 
his thirteenth year, and Isaac on the eighth day. . . 
The second promise concerning the Messiah is no 
further developed during the whole Jewish dispensa- 
tion. It is, indeed, repeated to Isaac and to Jacob, 
and confirmed by an oath at the virtual sacrifice of 
Isaac, and is called by Paul c the covenant con- 
firmed oy God [stj] concerning the Christ, made 
four hundred and thirty years before the giving of 
the law/ ... To sum up the whole, the two promises 
tendered to Abraham at the time of his being 
called, while he was yet in Ur, of Chaldea, and de- 
pending on which he consented to leave his own 
country and become a voluntary pilgrim for life, 
constitute the basis of two great institutions. The 
first promise is developed in the covenant concern- 
ing the inheritance, some ten or twelve years after 
he had become a pilgrim. The covenant of cir- 
cumcision was instituted twenty-four years after, 
and the Sinai covenant, or great national develop- 
ment, embracing all these other developments, was 
sealed four hundred and thirty years after the time 
of these two promises. The second promise, con- 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 17 

taming the spiritual blessing of the Gentiles of all 
nations in Christ, is denominated by Paul — Gal. 
iii — 'The covenant confirmed by God concerning 
Christ four hundred and thirty years before the 
law/" (Debate between Campbell and Rice, pp. 
289-292.) 

Rev. Mr. Frey, a Baptist minister, says, " A visi- 
ble Church was not known in Israel;" and then 
adds, "The blessings promised to Abraham and his 
natural seed, throughout ail their generations, were 
all of a temporal nature, and that without any 
regard to their personal character, conduct, or 
faith/' Again he says, "Pentecost was the time 
of the commencement of the Church of Christ." 
(Pp. 66-69.) 

Mr. Campbell again says, "That the covenant of 
which it [circumcision] was a sign was not the 
covenant of the Christian Church, will appear most 
evident from a fact which I will just now state; 
namely, that some eight hundred years after its 
establishment, Jeremiah foretold that it should be 
abolished, and that God would make a new covenant, 
and instead of writing his new laws upon marble or 
upon parchment, he would write them upon the 
hearts of his people." (Debate between Campbell 
and Rice, p. 297.) 

1. It will be seen that Mr. Campbell contends, 
throughout his remarks, for several covenants made 
at sundry times with Abraham, but furnishes no 
evidence of the fact, only that the Lord spoke with 
him at different times on different subjects. 
2 



18 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

2. He tries to identify the covenant with the law 
of Moses, an error into which anti-pedobaptists gen- 
erally fall, supposing, also, that the covenant was 
abolished with the law at the commencement of the 
new dispensation, 

3. He denies that the Abrahamic covenant was 
the covenant of the Christian Church. And the 
same ground is taken by Mr. Frey, and by anti- 
pedobaptists generally. And, indeed, they deny 
that the Church of Christ existed before the day 
of Pentecost. 

4. He claims that all the blessings promised to 
Abraham and his seed were of a temporal character, 
except one promise relating to the Messiah, and 
that they only embraced his natural offspring. 

We have thus presented pretty fully, and I trust 
fairly, the opinions of our opponents, for the pur- 
pose of showing their unscriptural bearing. As a 
pedobaptist we are free to admit that the Abrahamic 
covenant does contain important temporal blessings, 
both to Abraham and his natural descendants; but 
these were not confined exclusively to them. Nor 
do they destroy the spiritual character of the cove- 
nant; for Grod has promised great temporal bless- 
ings to his people in the New Testament; and in 
both the New and Old Testaments Gentiles who em- 
brace the true faith, and worship the living God, 
with their children, are admitted to all the privi- 
leges of natural -born Jews. While the people of 
God are connected with this world they are depend- 
ent upon divine Providence for their subsistence as 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 19 

well as for the means by which Church institutions 
are supported; and, consequently, provisions for 
their temporal well-being properly constitute a part 
of the constitution of the Church through all time; 
just as we find it in the Abrahamic covenant, with- 
out, in the least, impairing the general spiritual 
character of that document. But the point which 
we propose here to raise for discussion, is the posi- 
tion taken by Mr. Campbell, that three or more cov- 
enants were made with the patriarch Abraham. 

We will now introduce the reader to the incip- 
ient developments of the covenant made with Abra- 
ham, for the purpose of showing its general spiritual 
bearing, and at the same time to show the unity of 
its different parts; for before the Lord presented 
the covenant in detail, as we find it in the seven- 
teenth chapter of Genesis, he prepared the mind of 
the patriarch by sundry partial developments, suffi- 
cient to excite and strengthen his faith and render 
him an intelligent party in the covenant. 

I. We commence with Genesis xii, 1-3: "Now 
the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy 
country, and from thy kindred, and from thy 
father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee : 
and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will 
bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou 
shalt be a blessing : and I will bless them that bless 
thee, and curse him that curseth thee : and in thee 
shall all families of the earth be blessed. " This 
occurred when Abram was about seventy-five years 
of age, and while yet in "Ur of Chaldea." And 



20 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

here is wliere Mr. Campbell gets the u two promises v 
from which so many covenants and great institutions 
were subsequently developed. 

1. We find here a brief but distinct allusion to 
the land of Canaan, which was to become his future 
residence — "a land I will shew thee." Mr. Camp- 
bell, however, finds his first allusion to this land in 
the "fifteenth chapter of Genesis," where he at- 
tempts to make a distinct " covenant concerning the 
inheritance." 

2. A promise that Abram should be the father of 
"a great nation," a fact which his name indicates, 
referring primarily to the Jewish nation; which, in 
more respects than one, was "a great nation." 
Here is Mr. Campbell's first promise. 

3. A promise that Abram' s name shall be great — 
referring to a change which afterward was made in 
the name of the patriarch, which shall be duly con- 
sidered when we arrive at the final consideration of 
the covenant as recorded in the seventeenth chapter 
of Genesis ) showing, too, the identity of the prom- 
ise there and here. 

4. A promise that God would "bless" him, and 
make him a "blessing" to others. Abram, stand- 
ing at the head of the entire Church of God, and 
acting in behalf of the Church, enters into a cov- 
enant with God — receiving the promise of Divine 
mercy, is blessed; and securing in covenant from 
the same promise of mercy to others, he is made to 
them a blessing. 

5. A promise, "I will bless them that bless thee. 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 21 

and curse him that curseth thee." This promise 
had a primary reference to Abram in his exposed 
pilgrimage through life, and a secondary reference 
to his natural posterity in their national relations to 
other people; but tdtimately to the vicissitudes and 
exposures of God's Church now represented in the 
person of Abram. 

6. A promise that from Abram' s natural posterity 
Messiah should come, and by his death redeem all 
" nations" and " families" of the earth. Here is 
where Mr. Campbell gets his " second promise/' 
which, he says, "is not further developed during the 
whole Jewish dispensation," notwithstanding all the 
law and the prophets said concerning him. In Gen- 
esis xii, 1-3, we claim is the germ from which the 
different portions of the old Abrahamic covenant is 
ultimately developed. Nothing, to be sure, is here 
said of a covenant, nor are all the items ultimately 
denned as belonging to that covenant very fully set 
forth; but they are generally alluded to with suffi- 
cient definiteness to challenge the faith of the 
patriarch, and to prepare his mind for the grand 
result. 

II. The next instance in which this subject is 
introduced is Genesis xiii, 14-16: "And the Lord 
said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from 
him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the 
place where thou art, northward, and southward, 
and eastward, and westward : for all the land which 
thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed 
forever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of 



22 INFANT CHUUCH MEMBERSHIP. 

the earth. : so that if a man can number the dust 
of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered." 
The different items promised in Genesis xii, 1-3, 
are here summed up in two generic promises — the 
Lord choosing, in this instance, not to particularize. 

1. The land of Canaan is more fully described 
and secured by promise to Abram and his seed 
forever. 

2. "Thy seed" embraces both Abram' s natural 
and spiritual offspring and the Messiah; for St. 
Paul applies the term "seed" to each of these. 
The object, in this instance, seems to be to keep 
the mind of the patriarch awake to this grand pur- 
pose of the Almighty, and to exercise his faith by 
presenting the promise in the above comprehensive 
form. Abram was now residing in the land of 
Canaan. 

III. The third reference to this same subject is 
recorded in Genesis xv, 5-7 : "And he brought him 
forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, 
and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them : 
and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And 
he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him 
for righteousness. And he said unto him, I am the 
Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, 
to give thee this land to inherit it." 

1. Here the whole subject is again embraced in 
two general promises, precisely as in Genesis xiii, 
14-16, except their order is reversed, and the figure 
changed from the "dust of the earth" to the 
"stars" that glitter in the "heavens." 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 23 

2. If the reader lias a lingering doubt whether 
the promise concerning the "seed" of Abram em- 
braced Christ, let him remember that in the next 
verse it says Abram " believed in the Lord/' as 
there promised, "and he counted it to him for 
righteousness." Certainly Abram was not " counted 
righteous " for simply believing that he should have 
a very numerous natural offspring. 

3. If he is inclined to apply the term "seed" to 
the natural offspring of Abram, to the exclusion of 
the spiritual, let him turn to Romans, fourth chap- 
ter, where he will find a labored argument by the 
apostle to prove the contrary. Here, then, is all 
that was promised to Abram in the beginning, car- 
ried forward without any particular addition or 
alteration. 

Rev. Mr. Hibbard truly says, "That it has ever 
been a prevalent custom among the Orientals to 
teach by metaphor and allegory, by making sensible 
objects the representatives of spiritual things. . . . 
By this means a twofold sense is attached to almost 
every part of this covenant, a literal and a spiritual 
sense. Secondly, it is chiefly by the light of other 
parts of Scripture, and particularly of the New Test- 
ament, that we are to interpret the true meaning 
of the words of the covenant. . . . The same inspi- 
ration that guided Paul's pen in portraying its ex- 
alted character, doubtless shed its illuminations 
upon the mind of the patriarch. . . . All admit 
that these and kindred expressions imply a numer- 
ous and powerful natural posterity. But it is the 



24 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

twofold sense of these expressions to which we call 
attention; and it is that second and higher sense 
that they are made to include a promise of Gospel 
blessings." (Hibbard on Baptism, pp. 16, 17.) 

Notwithstanding Abrani fully believed the prom- 
ise of God in its twofold sense, embracing a numer- 
ous natural offspring, from whom the Messiah should 
come to bless all nations, as well as an equally- 
numerous spiritual posterity, composed of believers 
in Christ and their children forever, and that they 
were to inherit the land of Canaan, yet he seems 
anxious to have these promises reduced to a more 
substantial form. Hence he says — Genesis xv, 8 — - 
"Lord God, whereby shall I know that I shall 
inherit it ¥' In yielding to the request of Abram, 
as Dr. Macknight says, "God accommodated him- 
self to the ideas of mankind, who consider what is 
promised in a covenant as more binding than the 
simple declaration of one's intentions." 

IV. We now propose an examination of Genesis 
xv, 9-18 : "And he said unto him, Take me a heifer 
of three years old, and a she-goat of three years 
old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtle-dove, 
and a young pigeon. And he took unto him all 
these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each 
piece one against another : but the birds divided he 
not. And when the fowls came down upon the car- 
casses, Abram drove them away. And when the 
sun was going down, a deep sleep fell on Abram; 
and lo, a horror of great darkness fell upon him. 
And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 25 

thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not 
theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict 
them four hundred years. And also that nation 
whom they shall serve, will I judge; and afterward 
shall they come out with great substance. And 
thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be 
buried in a good old age. But in the fourth gener- 
ation they shall come hither again; for the iniquity 
of the Amorites is not yet full. And it came to 
pass that when the sun went down, and it was dark, 
behold a smoking furnace and a burning lamp that 
passed between those pieces. In that same day the 
Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto 
thy seed have I given this land, from the river of 
Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates." 

Thus, we see, the promises previously and repeat- 
edly made were now reduced to a most solemn cove- 
nant. And we challenge the advocates of a plu- 
rality of Abrahamic covenants, to show an instance 
beside this in which the regular forms of a cove- 
nant, with the appropriate sacrifices, were made or 
entered into by the Lord and the patriarch. 
* Dr. A. Clarke says, " For whatever purpose a cov- 
enant was made, it was ever ratified by a sacrifice, 
offered to God; and the passing between the divided 
parts of the victim appears to have signified that 
each agreed, if they broke the engagement, to sub- 
mit to the punishment of being cut asunder ; which 
we find — from Matt, xxiv, 51; Luke xii, 46 — was 
an ancient mode of punishment." 

Rabbi Solomon Jarchi says, "It was a custom 



26 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

with those wlio entered into a covenant with each 
other ; to take a heifer and cut it in two, and then 
the contracting parties passed between the pieces/ 7 
This being an extraordinary case, several animals 
were employed. St. Cyril, in his book against Ju- 
lian, shows that passing between the divided parts 
of a victim, was used also among the Chaldeans, 
Abram 7 s countrymen. As the sacrifice was required 
to make an atonement to God, so the death of the 
animal was necessary to signify to the contracting 
parties the punishment to which they exposed them- 
selves should they prove unfaithful. " See more on 
this subject in Clarke 7 s Commentary, on Genesis 
xv, 10. 

"Thus," says Dr. Macknight, "Abram was con- 
stituted the father of all believers, for the purpose 
of receiving on their behalf the promises of those 
blessings which God, of his great goodness, intends 
to bestow on them/ 7 And hence, as Rev. Mr. Ful- 
ler says, "This promise has been fulfilling ever 
since. All the true blessedness which the world is 
now, or shall be hereafter possessed of, is owing to 
Abram and his posterity. Through them we have* 
, a Bible, a Savior, and a Gospel. They are the stock 
on which the Christian Church is grafted. 77 This 
covenant, as we shall show when we come to ex- 
amine its final and most perfect development, in its 
grandest import, looked forward to Gospel days and 
Gospel blessings. 

Dr. A. Clarke says: "A covenant always sup- 
poses one of these four things : 



THE ABRAIIAMIC COVENANT. 27 

"1. That tlie contracting parties had been hith- 
erto unknown to each other, and were brought by 
the covenant into a state of acquaintance/' This 
was true in Abram's case, as well as with all those 
in whose behalf he covenanted. By " nature they 
know not God;" but by entering into the cove- 
nant by faith, are brought nigh, and made spirit- 
ually acquainted with hiin. 

"*2. That they had been previously in a state of 
hostility or enmity, and were brought by the cove- 
nant into a state of pacification and friendship." 
This also is true with regard to Abram and all for 
whom he covenanted. St. Paul says, " Among 
whom also we all had our conversation in time past 
in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of 
the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the 
children of wrath even as others. But God who is 
rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved 
us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened 
us together with Christ, . . . and hath made us to 
sit together in Christ Jesus." Eph. ii, 2-6. 

"3. Or being known to each other, they now 
agree to unite their counsels, strength, property, 
etc., for the accomplishment of a particular pur- 
pose, mutually subservient to the interests of both." 
In the covenant as finally specified — Gen. xvii — 
while Abram and his seed were engaged to "walk 
before God and to be perfect," God engages to be a 
"God unto him" and to his "seed" in all their 
"generations;" thus solemnly pledging each other 
to their mutual interests forever. 



28 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

"4. Or it implies an agreement to succor and de- 
fend a third party in cases of oppression and dis- 
tress." Hence, Abrain, and, like him, every believ- 
ing parent, is required to bring bis infant offspring 
into a covenant relation witb God, the parent bind- 
ing bimself to teacb, govern, protect, and provide 
for tbe temporal as well as spiritual interests of tbe 
cliild, and tbe Lord engaging to be its God in a very 
especial sense forever. 

Tbus far tbe reader will find but one covenant 
made witb Abram. And after tbe most careful 
investigation we bave been able to make, we bave 
found not a single instance in wbicb two Abrabamic 
covenants are spoken of. Tbe following Scriptures 
will illustrate tbis fact: "And God beard tbeir 
groanings, and God remembered bis covenant witb 
Abraham, witb Isaac, and witb Jacob," Exodus ii, 
24; "Be ye mindful always of bis covenant, tbe 
word wbicb be commanded to a tbousand genera- 
tions; even of tbe covenant wbicb be made witb 
Abrabam, and of bis oath unto Isaac; and batb 
confirmed tbe same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel 
for an everlasting covenant," 1 Cbron. xvi, 15-17; 
"Ye are tbe children of the prophets, and of the 
covenant which God made with our fathers, saying 
unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kin- 
dreds of the earth be blessed," Acts iii, 25; "And 
he gave him the covenant of circumcision; and so 
Abraham begat Isaac," etc., Acts vii, 8. In all 
these instances, though different parts of the cove- 
nant are referred to, the covenant itself is spoken 



THE ABRAHAMIO COVENANT. 29 

of as a unit. The only passage of Scripture quoted 
by Mr. Campbell in proof of a plurality of cove- 
nants made with Abraham, is — Horn. ix, 4 — "Who 
are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and 
the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the 
law, and the service of God, and the promises." 
True, Paul here speaks of a plurality of covenants, 
but to whom do they " appertain?" Not to Abra- 
ham, but to "the Israelites." Moses tells us — 
Deut. xxix, 1 — "These are the words of the cove- 
nant, which the Lord commanded Moses to make 
with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, 
besides the covenant which he made with them in 
Horeb." God made two covenants with "the Israel- 
ites;" one at "Horeb," and the other at "Moab." 
To these Paul refers, and not to covenants made 
with Abraham. There was, then, but one Abra- 
hamic covenant; embracing, to be sure, some things 
of a temporal nature, but even these were typical 
of great spiritual blessings promised. The general 
character of the covenant was, therefore, spiritual; 
and circumcision being a part of that spiritual cov- 
enant, and a token of spiritual things which it con- 
tained, the token was itself of spiritual import. 
But as the nature and design of this token will be 
discussed in another part of this work, we will dis- 
miss it for the present. 



30 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 



SECTION II. 

THE COVENANT AS FINALLY DEVELOPED WITH ABKAHAM, AND 
EXPLAINED BY ST. PAUL. 

We now approach the final and full development 
of the Abrahamic covenant, which took place about 
twenty-four years after the call of Abram to leave 
his father's house in Haram, where the first promise 
was made. Gen. xvii, 1-14: "And when Abram 
was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared 
to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty 
God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. And I 
will make my covenant between me and thee, and 
will multiply thee exceedingly. And Abram fell 
on his face; and God talked with him, saying, As 
for me, behold my covenant is with thee, and thou 
shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall 
thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name 
shall be called Abraham; for a father of many na- 
tions have I made thee. And I will make thee ex- 
ceeding fruitful, and will make nations of thee, and 
kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish 
my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed 
after thee in their generations, for an everlasting 
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed 
after thee. Anil I will give unto thee, and thy seed 
after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all 
the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession; 
and I will be their God. And God said unto Abra- 



THE ABRAHAMIO COVENANT. 31 

ham, Tliou shalt keep niy covenant therefore, thou, 
and thy seed after thee, in their generations. This 
is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and 
you, and thy seed after thee; Every man-child 
among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall cir- 
cumcise the flesh of your foreskin ; and it shall be 
a token of the covenant between me and you. And 
he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among 
you, every man-child in your generations, he that is 
born in the house, or bought with money of any 
stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is 
born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy 
money, must needs be circumcised : and my cove- 
nant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting cove- 
nant. And the uncircumcised man-child whose 
flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul 
shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken 
my covenant." The covenant as here presented is 
composed of three important parts — a precept, a 
promise, and a rite, or ordinance, each of which we 
will now proceed to examine, both as they were un- 
derstood by the high contracting parties at the time, 
and by subsequent inspired writers, especially in the 
New Testament. 

I. It contains a precept. u The Lord appeared to 
Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty 
God; walk before me, and be thou perfect." In 
examining this precept let us ascertain, 

1. Its author. "I am the Almighty God" — a 
being of infinite perfections. Dr. A. Clarke trans- 
lates and comments upon this passage as follows: 



82 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

"I am the Almighty God — ani el sJiaddai — I am 
God all-sufficient; from shadah, to shed, to pour out. 
I am that God who pours out blessings, who gives 
them richly, abundantly, continually" Now, in 
speaking of this same covenant, St. Paul uses the 
following remarkable language: "And this I say, 
That the covenant that was confirmed before of God 
in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and 
thirty years after, can not disannul, that it should 
make the promise of none effect." Gal. iii, 17. So it 
appears, from the testimony of St. Paul, that it was 
"the Almighty God/' in the person of Jesus Christ, 
that made this covenant with Abraham, and was 
the author of this precept. This fact is further 
confirmed by Jesus Christ himself, when he said, 
"Before Abraham was, I am." St. John viii, 58. 

(1.) The Being that entered into covenant with 
Abraham was seen by him — Gen. xviii, 1 — "And the 
Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre;" 
and also by Jacob — Gen. xxxii, 30 — "For I have 
seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." 

(2.) The Lord in his relation as Father has never 
assumed a visible form so as to be seen by the 
human eye. "Such Divine revelations are always 
made in the person of his Son." St. John i, 18 : 
"No man hath seen God at any time; the only-be- 
gotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, 
he hath declared him." 

This we deem a very important point in our gen- 
eral argument, because, if the Abrahamic covenant 
is the charter, or constitution of the Christian 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 33 

Church, it is important that it be shown that Jesus 
Christ was the author of that covenant; and as 
Jesus Christ in his Divine nature is one with the 
Father, infinite in all his attributes, especially in 
power, and is the medium through which the Father 
reveals himself, not only to the human eye, but 
especially to the human heart, in blessings riclily, 
abundantly, and continually -, he, it seems, answers 
the sublime description given by himself when he 
said, " I am the Almighty G od ) walk before me, and 
be thou perfect." And what frail, human being 
would not tremble at receiving such a precept from 
any source save Jesus Christ, who alone could enable 
him to obey it ? 

2. The precept itself. This is given in two 
parts, so nearly allied, however, that neither can be 
obeyed without obeying the other. 

(1.) "Walk before me." To "walk" means to be 
active, persevering, to go forward in the discharge 
of duty. "Before me." Let all you think, say, or 
do be done as in my immediate presence, and under 
the constant inspection of my pure and penetrating 
eye. How could a stronger incentive have been 
given to an upright, holy, and active religious life 
than is given in these words ? And yet it is pre- 
cisely what the apostle enjoins upon all the follow- 
ers of Christ, when he says, "That ye might walk 
worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful 
in every good work." Col. i, 10. 

(2.) And "be thou perfect." The highest pre- 
cept ever given to mortal man. This implies, first, 
3 



34 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

a negative perfection — ' o "be perfectly free from the 
guilt, power, practice, and pollution of sin : as the 
Lord said to the descendants of Abraham many 
years after ; "Ye shall therefore be holy, for I am 
holy;" and as Peter said at a still later period, "But 
as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in 
all manner of conversation ; because it is written, Be 
ye holy, for I am holy;" and as St. Paul has said, 
"Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let 
us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh 
and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." 
This precept implies, secondly, a positive perfection — 
a perfect consecration of i „ A, body, and spirit to 
God, or, as St. Paul has it, to be "sanctified wholly;" 
and in addition to this, to be perfectly "filled with 
all the fullness of God," and thus be enabled to 
love God perfectly, or, as Christ describes it, to 
" love God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, 
and with all thy strength ; and to love thy neighbor 
as thyself." This, in short, is the perfection enjoined 
by the same Being. Matt, v, 48 : " Be ye therefore 
perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is 
perfect." And if any person doubts the possibility 
of attaining to this perfection, we will only point 
him to the Being who enjoined it upon Abraham, as 
well as upon all believers: "I am the Almighty 
God," etc.: speaking of whom the apostle says, 
"Unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly 
above all that we can ask or think, according to the 
power that worketh in us." Eph. iii, 20. The above 
precept, then, was established by Jesus Christ as a 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 35 

permanent article in the constitution of his Church 
when that Church was first organized, and he has 
never repealed or altered it, and probably never will 
till the Church militant is made to sing the new 
song in heaven. 

II. It contained a promise. This general promise, 
as will be seen, consists of several important particu- 
lars, which we will now examine, describing each 
separately. 

1. A promise of a numerous natural offspring, 
especially through the lineage of Isaac and Jacob. 
This part of the general promise is found in verses 2 
and 6, " And will multiply thee exceedingly ;" 
"And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I 
will make nations of thee, and kings shall come 
out of thee." That this refers to Abraham's 
natural descendants through Isaac is proven — Gen. 
xxi, 12 — "For in Isaac shall thy seed be called." 
And this natural seed, as we learn from the apostle, 
was typical of those who should be made "free in- 
deed" by the Gospel: "But we, brethren, as Isaac 
was, are the children of promise," Gal. iv, 28; "So 
then, brethren, we are not children of the bond- 
women, but of the free," Gal. iv, 31. 

2. A promise that his "seed" should have all 
the "land of Canaan for an everlasting possession." 
Gen. xvii, 8. This promise, however, was under- 
stood to be conditional. Its fulfillment depended 
upon their fidelity to God, with whom the covenant 
was made. This land of Canaan was called "an 
everlasting possession," because as a nation the 



36 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

descendants of Abraham were to possess it to the 
end of the world, but more especially because it was 
a type of a heavenly Canaan, which, if faithful to 
God, they were forever to possess, the term everlast- 
ing covering their possession in both worlds. Dr. 
Clarke says that the word olam, here rendered 
"everlasting," means "eternal;" " but when applied 
to things which, from their nature, must have a 
limited duration, it is properly to be understood in 
this sense, because those things, though temporal 
in themselves, shadow forth things that are eternal." 
(Clarke's Commentary, Gen. xxi, 33.) And it is 
evident that Abraham understood the promised land 
of Canaan to be a type of heaven; for "by faith 
he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange 
country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and 
Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise; for 
he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose 
builder and maker is God." Heb. xi, 9, 10. He 
" looked for a city;" that is, looked by means of 
the promise of the earthly Canaan as a type, for the 
heavenly city, as the real substance promised. 
Again: when the Israelites sinned in the wilder- 
ness, the Lord interdicted their entrance into the 
promised land — Num. xiv, 23-30 — and &ve hundred 
years after this — Psalm xcv — -David admonished his 
countrymen not to "harden their heart as in the 
provocation in the wilderness," and speaks of God's 
oath, by which he excluded them from "his rest;" 
intimating that if they followed their pernicious 
example, they too " should not enter into his rest." 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 37 

But in its application to David's countrymen, he 
could not refer to literal Canaan as "his" rest, for 
they had long before that time u entered into/' and 
were then enjoying the "rest" of literal Canaan. 
But as they were now candidates for a heavenly 
"rest/' of which Canaan was the divinely-appointed 
type, they could see, by the chastisement of their 
fathers in the wilderness, what would be, if they 
sinned, their ultimate chance for heaven. Here, 
then, it is quite evident that the Psalmist speaks 
of the "rest" of Canaan, as a type of the "rest" 
of heaven; and in the familiar and unceremonious 
manner in which he employs this figure, shows that 
it was generally so understood. St. Paul, in his 
Epistle to the Hebrews — third and fourth chapters — 
quotes the language of David, and applies it in a 
way that leaves no doubt on this subject. He says, 
"Wherefore, as the Holy Ghost saith, To-day if ye 
will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the 
provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilder- 
ness; when your fathers tempted me, proved me, 
and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was 
grieved with that generation, and said, They do 
always err in their heart; and they have not known 
my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not 
enter into my rest. Take heed, brethren, lest there 
be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in de- 
parting from the living God. But exhort one an- 
other daily, while it is called to-day; lest any of you 
be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For 
we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the 



38 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end; 
while it is said, To-day if you will hear his voice, 
harden not your hearts ; as in the provocation. For 
some, when they had heard, did provoke; howbeit, 
not all who came out of Egypt by Moses. But 
with whom was he grieved forty years? Was it not 
with them that had sinned, whose carcasses fell in 
the wilderness ? And to whom sware he that they 
should not enter into his rest, but to them that be- 
lieved not ? So we see that they could not enter in 
because of unbelief. Let us therefore fear, lest a 
promise being left us of entering into his rest, any 
of you should seem to come short of it. . . . 
Let us labor, therefore, to enter into that rest, lest 
any man fall after the same example of unbelief." 

This land, then, being a type of heaven, and the 
covenant promising both to Abraham's faithful seed, 
it gives a very high spiritual character to this part 
of the covenant, and furnishes a good reason for 
calling it an everlasting covenant. 

3. A promise that the " Almighty God" should 
be the God of Abraham and of his seed forever. 
And the Almighty God that makes this promise is 
the infinite Deity "in Christ." "And I will estab- 
lish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed 
after thee, in their generations, for an everlasting 
covenant, to be a God unto thee and to thy seed 
after thee." Gen. xvii, 7. 

"How large the promise, how divine, 
To Abraham and his seed : 
I am a God to thee and thine, 
Supplying all their need !" 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 39 

" God is in the midst of them; hence } they are not 
consumed.^ 

4. A promise that Abraham should be the father 
of the believing world, with their infant offspring, 
whether Jews or Gentiles, whether in or out of lit- 
eral Canaan. 

The promise says, " Behold, my covenant is with 
thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. 
Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, 
but thy name shall be Abraham ; for a father of 
many nations have I made thee. . . . And I will 
establish my covenant between me and thee, and 
thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an ev- 
erlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to 
thy seed after thee," Gen. xvii, 5-7; "And I will 
make thy seed as the dust of the earth ; so that if 
a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall 
thy seed also be numbered," Gen. xiii, 16; "And 
he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now 
toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to 
number them; and he said unto him, So shall thy 
seed be," Gen. xv, 5. 

We have before referred to the fact of the twofold 
meaning of the language above employed. We 
have also shown the literal, or first and lowest signi- 
fication to be attached. 

We now propose examining the second, higher, 
and spiritual sense, in which the above language has 
been understood down through both dispensations. 
We will not now attempt to show the privileges 
which this covenant conferred upon infants, as their 



40 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

relation to it, and the Church of God, will be care- 
fully investigated in another part of this work. 
But we will here confine ourselves principally to the 
relation this covenant permanently fixed between 
Abraham and believers in Christ, whether Jews or 
Gentiles. We will, first of all, examine the mean- 
ing of Genesis xvii, 5: " Neither shall thy name 
any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be 
Abraham ; for a father of many nations have I made 
thee." In examining this passage, the first thing 
of importance we find is, the change in the patri- 
arch's name, from Abram to Abraham. Now, the 
all-wise Jehovah never acts, even in the most unim- 
portant affairs of human life, without some design. 
But what was his design in the above change in 
the patriarch's name? We claim that it was to 
indicate a new and very important relation the pa- 
triarch was henceforth to sustain to the Church of 
God, which relation the name itself indicates. 

"The word Abram/' says Dr. Clarke, " literally 
signifies a high or exalted father" A father of " a 
great nation/' literally. But now the covenant is 
made, and the Church about to be organized in 
Abram's family; and he is henceforth to be its 
spiritual father, and his name must be changed so 
as to indicate that relation. 

" Abraham," says Dr. Clarke, u differs from the 
preceding only in one letter; it has n — he — before 
the last radical." And the reason given for this ad- 
dition by the Almighty is, " a father of many nations 
have I made thee/' or, as Dr. Clarke renders it, "A 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 41 

father of a multitude of nations have I made thee" 
Now, it can not be supposed that the words "many 
nations/' or, especially, "multitude of nations/' em- 
brace the other sons of Abraham, with Isaac, and 
their descendants; for the promise is, "In Isaac 
shall thy seed be called." But as this whole sub- 
ject was discussed by St. Paul in his Epistles, we 
will turn thither for further information. See Eom. 
iv, 13, 14 : " For the promise that he should be heir 
of the world, [father of a multitude of nations,] was 
not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, 
[did not embrace his lawful seed only,] but through 
the righteousness of faith. For if they which are 
of the law [the Jews] be heirs, [alone,] faith is 
made void, and the promise made of none effect." 
Here the apostle asserts that the natural seed of 
Abraham — the Jews — were not the only persons in- 
terested in the above promise ; that the promise con- 
stituted Abraham "heir of the world" — meaning 
the believing world, as will be seen in the 16th and 
17th verses : "Therefore it is of faith, that it might 
be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure 
to all the seed : not to that only which is of the law, 
[the Jews,] but to that also which is of the faith of 
Abraham, [believing Gentiles,] who is the father of 
us all," both Jews and Gentiles. And here comes 
the promise which secures to him this relation: 
"As it is written, I have made thee a father of many 
nations before him whom he believed, even God." 
Again : in the 11th and 12th verses of this same 
chapter, he says, "And he [Abraham] received the 



42 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of 
the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised ; 
that he might be the father of all them that be- 
lieve, though they be not circumcised, that right- 
eousness might be imputed unto them also; and 
the father of circumcision [or of the covenant that 
contained it] to them that are not of the circum- 
cision only, [converted Gentiles,] but who also walk 
in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, 
which he had being yet uncircuincised." In the 
eleventh verse it will be seen that the apostle ex- 
pressly declares that Abraham was the " father of 
all them that believe, though they be not circum- 
cised" — are not Jews. 

Dr. Clarke, in his comments upon this chapter, 
makes the following very appropriate remarks : 
"Why, then, should the Jews oppose the Gentiles? 
especially as the Gentiles were actually included in 
the covenant made with Abraham; for the prom- 
ise — Gen. xvii, 5 — stated that he should be the 
father of many nations; consequently, the covenant 
being made with Abraham, as the head or father of 
many nations, all in any nation who stood on the 
same religious principle with him, were his seed, 
and with him are interested in the same covenant. 
But Abraham stood by faith in the mercy of God 
pardoning him; and upon this footing the believing 
Gentiles stand in the Gospel; and, therefore, they 
are the seed of Abraham, and included in the cove- 
nant and promise made to him." These facts are 
again stated by the same apostle, in his Epistle to the 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 43 

Galatians — iii, 6, 7 — "Even as Abraham believed 
God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 
Know ye, therefore, that they which are of faith, the 
same are the children of Abraham." And in the 
ninth verse, " So, then, they which be of faith are 
blessed with faithful Abraham." Believing Gen- 
tiles, therefore, are not only "blessed with Abra- 
ham," but they are his "children." 

Bev. , Mr. Taylor, an eminent English divine, 
referring to the above passages, remarks as follows : 
"Abraham, when he stood before God and received 
the promise, did not, in the account of God, appear 
as a private person, but as a father of us all; as the 
head said father of the whole future Church of God, 
from whom we were all — believing Jews and Gen- 
tiles — to descend; as we were to be accepted p^d 
interested in the Divine blessing and covenant after 
the same manner as he was; namely, by faith." 
But, however valuable may be the opinions of good 
men on this subject, the declarations of inspiration 
are only to be relied upon as evidence. 

St. Paul again says: "And if ye be Christ's, 
then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to 
the promise." Gal. iii, 29. All that are " Christ's," 
then, " are Abraham's seed." And who are Christ's ? 
You will answer, no doubt, all true evangelical be- 
lievers in Christ. Truly, and their infant offspring 
with them. Well, then, all true evangelical believ- 
ers in Christ, with their infant offspring, "are Abra- 
ham's seed," and "heirs according to the promise, 
a father of many nations have I made thee." 



44 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

In Psalm ii, 7, 8, we read, "Thou art my son; this 
day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall 
give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and 
the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. " 
Well, when the " heathen" and the " uttermost 
parts of the earth " become Christ's, then will the 
"heathen" and "the uttermost parts of the earth" 
be "Abraham's seed;" for all that are "Christ's, 
are Abraham's seed." 

Again : Zechariah — ix, 10 — prophesied of Christ, 
that "he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and 
his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from 
the river even to the ends of the earth." Well, 
when Christ's dominion is thus extended, "from sea 
even to sea, and from the river to the ends of the 
earth," then will all those who are subjects of 
Christ's dominion be "Abraham's seed;" for "if ye 
are Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs 
according to the promise." And when this proph- 
ecy is fulfilled, then truly will Abraham be " heir 
of the world," or "father of a multitude of na- 
tions," as the promise reads. 

Rev. Mr. Fuller winds up this subject in the fol- 
lowing appropriate language: "The first promise in 
this covenant is, that he shall be the father of many 
nations; and as a token of it, his name in future is 
to be called Abraham. He had the name of a high, 
or eminent father, from the beginning; but now it 
shall be more comprehensive, indicating a very large 
progeny. By the exposition given of this promise 
in the New Testament — Romans iv, 16, 17 — we are 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 45 

directed to understand it, not only of those who 
sprang from Abraham's body, though these be many 
nations, but also of all that shall be of the faith of 
Abraham. It went to make him the father of the 
Church of God in all future ages, or, as the apostle 
calls him, the heir of the world. In this view he is 
the father of many, even a multitude of nations/' 

III. The covenant contains a rite, or Church 
ordinance. "This is my covenant, which ye shall 
keep, between me and you, and thy seed after thee; 
Every man-child among you shall be circumcised." 
Genesis xvii, 10. 

"This is my covenant/' or token of my covenant, 
as it is called in the eleventh verse. If circumcis- 
ion, as Mr. Campbell asserts, was a separate and 
distinct covenant by itself, of what covenant was it 
a token? Was it a token of itself? or was one cov- 
enant a token of another? We would like exceed- 
ingly to see an answer to these inquiries. And ; 
then, where were the appropriate covenant sacrifices 
offered ? Circumcision was n >t itself a covenant, 
but a token of a covenant previously made. Hence, 
when Stephen spoke of the "covenant of circum- 
cision ' ; — Acts vii, 8 — he meant the covenant of 
which circumcision was a token. And when the 
Lord said, "This is my covenant, which ye shall 
keep," he meant, " This is the token of my covenant, 
which ye shall keep," etc. And this covenant, of 
which circumcision was a token, is the one spoken 
of in the fourth verse, where the Lord said, "Be- 
hold my covenant is with thee;" having been made 



46 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

and ratified by appropriate sacrifices in the fifteenth 
chapter of Genesis, it being the only covenant ever 
made with the patriarch by the Almighty God. 



SECTION III. 

THE PEEMANENT .CHAEACTEE OF THE ABEAHAMIC COVENANT 
CONSIDERED. 

"Beader, attend! ( I am the God of Abraham, 
the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob : this is 
my name forever, and this is my memorial to all 
generations/ And shall not the name, the calling, 
the blessing, and the history of Abraham always 
occupy a large space in the records of God's gov- 
ernment of man, and in all the details of his 
redemption ! 

" Because of his unprecedented faith in d's 
promises and exalted piety, he was constituted the 
father of all believers; and his whole life is made a 
model for all the children of God, as far as walking 
by faith in God's promises is an ornament to human 
character." (Christian System, p. 134.) 

"The blessing of Abraham was then promised in 
the patriarchal age, antecedent to the Jewish na- 
tional institution, and independent of it; therefore, 
that institution can not affect, much less disannul, 
the blessings promised in the covenant, confirmed 
before by God, respecting the Messiah, in the time 



THE ABRAHAMIO COVENANT. 47 

of family worship, and four hundred and thirty 
years before the Jewish institution began." (Chris- 
tian System, p. 188.) 

When Mr. Campbell wrote the above, he was not 
engaged in controversy against the perpetuity of 
the Abrahamic covenant; but had probably just 
read the sublime language in which its perpetually- 
binding character is so clearly and forcibly described, 
and gave spontaneous utterance to the truth. What 
a pity that afterward, in his debate with Mr. Rice 
and others, he should try to connect the Abrahamic 
and Sinaitic institutions together, and then to sweep 
them both from existence at the beginning of the 
new dispensation! Our object, in this place, is to 
show that the Abrahamic covenant was not made 
for any particular dispensation, but for all time. 

I. The covenant provides for and proclaims its 
own perpetuity in the following language: "And I 
will establish my covenant between me and thee, 
and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an 
everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and thy 
seed after thee/' Genesis xvii, 7 ; "And I will give 
unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land 
wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, 
for an everlasting possession" Genesis xvii, 8; "And 
my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting 
covenant" Genesis xvii, 13. But here we will be 
met with numerous quotations from the writings of 
Moses, and even from the New Testament, where 
the word everlasting is applied to things that have 
terminated, or will terminate in time; and even it 



48 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

may be said that some tilings promised in the Abra- 
hamic covenant have ended long since. 

The following statement of facts, made by Dr. A. 
Clarke, will set this whole subject in its true light: 
"In all languages words have, in process of time, 
deviated from their original acceptations, and have 
been accommodated to particular purposes, and lim- 
ited to particular meanings. This has happened 
both to the Hebrew o 1 ?)^ olam, and the Greek auo«/; 
they have been both used to express a limited time, 
but in general a time the limits of which are un- 
known; and thus a pointed reference to the original 
ideal meaning is still kept up. 

" Those who bring any of these terms, in an ac- 
commodated sense, to favor a particular doctrine, 
etc., must depend upon the good graces of their 
opponents for permission to use them in this way. 

"For as the real grammatical meaning of both 
words is eternal, and all other meanings only accom- 
modated ones, sound criticism, in all matters of dis- 
pute concerning the import of a word or term, must 
have recourse to the grammatical meaning, and its 
use among the earliest and most correct writers in 
the language, and will determine all accommodated 
meanings by this alone. 

" Now, the first and best writers in both of these 
languages apply olam and aiov to express eternal in 
the proper meaning of that word ; and this is their 
proper meaning in the Old and New Testaments 
when applied to God, his attributes, his operations, 
taken in connection with the ends for which he 



THE ABRAIIAMIC COVENANT. 49 

performs them, for c whatsoever he doeth, it shall be 
forever, [obiySiTiTj yihyeh leolam,~] it shall be for 
eternity.' Eccl. iii, 14. Forms and appearances of 
created things may change, but the counsels and 
purposes of God relative to them are permanent 
and eternal, and none of them can be frustrated; 
hence the words, when applied to things which 
from their nature must have a limited duration, are 
properly to be understood in this sense, because 
those things, though temporal in themselves, shadow 
forth things that are eternal. Thus the Jewish 
dispensation, which, in the whole and in its parts, 
is frequently said to be ttSu? 1 ?, leolam, forever, and 
which has terminated in the Christian dispensation, 
has the word properly applied to it, because it typi- 
fied and introduced that dispensation which is to 
continue not only while time shall last, but is to have 
its incessant accumulating consummation through- 
out eternity." (See Clarke's comments at the close 
of Genesis xxi.) 

The above remarks were not made in relation to 
the duration of the Abrahamic covenant, but in 
reference to the meaning generally to be attached 
to those particular terms wherever used in the 
sacred Scriptures; and I think it would be difficult 
to find a more competent witness in reference to the 
meaning of words, where he had no other interest 
at stake than the common interests of sacred and 
eternal truth. Taking his definitions for our guide, 
let us see what they prove in relation to the Abra- 
hamic covenant. 

4 



50 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

1. The first instance in which the word everlast- 
ing occurs is in the seventh verse : " And I will 
establish my covenant between me and thee, and 
thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an 
everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to 
thy seed after thee." We have elsewhere proven 
that it was not Abraham's numerous natural seed 
alone that was here referred to, but a still much 
more numerous spiritual seed, embracing all be- 
lievers in Christ with their infant offspring; for 
"if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed," 
whether Jews or Gentiles. And God's covenant, 
as we have previously proven, was with Abraham 
in behalf of these, in which he promised to be 
their God forever. Here, then, the term olam, ever- 
lasting, must be taken in its natural grammatical 
meaning; for, as the Doctor asserts in his comments 
on this very passage, "As the soul is to endure for- 
ever, so it shall eternally stand in need of the sup- 
porting power and energy of God," as secured in 
this covenant; "And as the reign of the Gospel 
dispensation shall be as long as sun and moon 
endure, and its consequences eternal, so must the 
covenant be on which these are founded." 

2. As the term everlasting can only be used in an 
"accommodated sense," when the object to which 
it is applied does " shadow forth something that is 
eternal," we must, therefore, understand the term 
olam, everlasting, as it occurs in the eighth verse, in 
connection with the land of Canaan, in this sense. 
It reads, "And I will give unto thee, and to thy 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 51 

seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stran- 
ger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting pos- 
session." We have before proven that the land of 
Canaan was a type of heaven; hence, although this 
possession was temporal in itself, yet it " shadowed 
forth something that is eternal;" and this substance 
thus " shadowed forth," being the principal thing 
which the covenant was designed eternally to secure 
to the spiritual seed of Abraham, a " pointed ref- 
erence to the original ideal meaning of olam is still 
kept up" 

3. The third instance in which olam, everlasting, 
occurs is in connection with the rite, or ordinance, 
of the covenant, in the thirteenth verse : "And my 
covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting 
covenant." It "shall be in the flesh" of all of 
Abraham's spiritual seed, to the end of time, as a 
token of a covenant relation, " shadowing forth 
things that are eternal;" and hence, as all the dif- 
ferent parts of the Abrahamic covenant either 
described or "shadowed forth things that are eter- 
nal," therefore, the Abrahamic covenant, in its 
spiritual character, remains forever binding upon 
both the parties between whom this solemn con- 
tract is made ; and both the God of the patriarch 
and Abraham and his seed are forever held bound 
in a most solemn contract to each other. 

II. A few other passages of Scripture assert the 
perpetuity of the Abrahamic covenant. Gen. xxii, 
15-18 : "And the angel of the Lord called to Abra- 
ham out of heaven the second time, and said, By 



52 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because 
thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld 
thy son, thine only son ; that in blessing I will bless 
thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as 
the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is 
upon the sea-shore; and thy seed shall possess the 
gate of his enemies. And in thy seed shall all the 
nations of the earth be blessed." Let us contem- 
plate the solemn character of the oath by which the 
covenant previously made is here confirmed. "By 
myself have I sworn, saith the Lord." The Psalmist 
refers to the above covenant and oath in the follow- 
ing language : u He hath remembered his covenant 
forever, the word which he commanded to a thou- 
sand generations. Which covenant he made with 
Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac; and confirmed 
the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an 
everlasting covenant." Psalm cv, 8-10. Every 
sentence here declares, in a most positive manner, 
the perpetuity of the Abrahamic covenant. It is 
" forever," "to a thousand generations," "an ever- 
lasting covenant." St. Paul also refers to it in the 
following language: "Wherein God, willing more 
abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the 
immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath : 
That by two immutable things, in which it was 
impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong 
consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold 
upon the hope set before us." Heb. vi, 17, 18. 
God's "immutable counsel" consists in his unalter- 
able purpose to bless and multiply the seed of Abra- 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 53 

ham, and through them to bless the "world with a 
Messiah. The "two immutable things " by which 
this was confirmed to Abraham was a covenant and 
oath, in neither of which was it "possible that God 
should lie;" that is, fail in the smallest particular 
to accomplish his purpose. The perpetuity of the 
covenant could not well be described in stronger 
terms. 

1. What is promised to Abraham under the 
solemnities of an oath? He says, "Blessing, I will 
bless thee." I will send blessings upon thee, richly, 
abundantly ', continually ', eternally; and "multiplying, 
I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, 
and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore." How 
perfectly this defies all human calculation ! As well 
might we try to number the multitude which the 
Kevelator saw in heaven. Again: "Thy seed shall 
possess the gate of his enemies." By the gate may 
be meant all the strength, whether troops, counsels, 
or fortified cities of their enemies. To this same 
seed, Isaiah — lx, 12 — says, "The nation and king- 
dom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those 
nations shall be utterly wasted;" Daniel — vii, 27 — 
says, "And the kingdom and dominion, and the 
greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, 
shall be given to the people of the saints of the 
Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting king« 
dom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him." 
And again : " And in thy seed shall all the nations 
of the earth be blessed." We have the authority 
of St. Paul — Gal. iii, 16 — for applying this to our 



54 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

blessed Lord ; who was the seed through whom alone 
God's blessings should be conveyed to all the nations 
of the earth. 

2. These promises can not apply to Abraham's 
natural seed, only as they became,, and continued to 
be, his spiritual children, in which sense it would 
also embrace truly-converted Gentiles; for "they 
which are of faith, the same are the children of 
Abraham." Gal. iii, 7. Now, take a brief view of 
the history of the children of Israel, in their tem- 
poral and political character, and see whether in 
that relation the above promise has been fulfilled. 
During the first five hundred years they did not 
possess the first foot of land in Canaan, except what 
Abraham and Jacob bought and paid for, spending 
most of their time either in cruel bondage in Egypt, 
or in homeless solitude in the wilderness. True, in 
one instance it is said that they were as numerous 
as the " stars of heaven" — Deut. x, 22 — and in 
another instance it is said that Israel "were many, 
as the sand which is by the sea in multitude" — 1 
Kings iv, 20. It is also true that God gave them 
to " possess the gate of their enemies," so far as 
conquering the Canaanites was concerned ; but the 
above covenant and oath, as we have seen, secures 
a perpetuation of these " blessings," which we do 
not find in the temporal history of the Israelites. 
Though greatly increased in numbers and in wealth, 
during the reigns of David and Solomon, yet, soon 
after the death of the latter, the kingdom of Israel 
became divided, and began to decline ; and after being 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 55 

repeatedly conquered, wasted, and pillaged by their 
enemies, ten of the tribes were carried away into 
Assyria, and have never been heard of since, leaving 
but two tribes in Israel, and they soon became con- 
solidated in one, and, after being carried into Baby- 
lon, and cruelly oppressed for seventy years, were per- 
mitted to return, only to become a fruitful source 
of contention between the surrounding nations, 
passing, after a bloody resistance, under the domin- 
ion of each, and in quick succession from one to 
the other, seldom enjoying, for any length of time, 
the least respite from war and oppression, till the 
Romans were sent upon them, and the last vestige 
of national freedom was wrested from them. 

Micah — vii, 20 — says, "Thou wilt perform the 
truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which 
thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days 
of old." How, let me ask, do the above histor- 
ical facts and prophetic declaration agree? Who 
can look upon the scattered, oppressed, and de- 
graded condition of the descendants of the venera- 
ble patriarchs, and then think of the covenant and 
oath of God, made to Abraham, in which he prom- 
ised forever to bless and multiply his seed, and say 
that God is now fulfilling that covenant and oath to 
Abraham's natural seed? 

3. To Abraham's spiritual seed the covenant and 
oath are being fulfilled every day before us. Luke 
i, 72-75. Zechariah says that God visited his peo- 
ple (t to perform the mercy promised to our fathers, 
and had remembered his holy covenant; the oath 



56 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

which lie sware to our father Abraham, that he 
would grant unto us, that we ; being delivered out of 
the hand of our enemies, might serve him with 
fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all 
the days of our lives." At the ushering in of the 
Gospel dispensation, when the natural descendants 
of Abraham were about to be cat off from their land 
and national blessings, and scattered throughout all 
nations by their enemies, and made a hy-word of 
reproach among all people, we see a man filled with 
the Holy Ghost, proclaiming the fulfillment of the 
covenant and oath which the Lord had made with 
Abraham, not by the advent of Messiah alone, but 
by its effects in " delivering" his people out of the 
"hand of their enemies;" enabling them to " serve 
him with fear, in holiness and righteousness, all 
the days of their lives." Instead of disfranchising 
his people, among the Jews, of their ancient Church 
privileges, valued so highly by them, they were now 
to enjoy them in the fullest sense specified in the 
covenant. The coming of Messiah, the ushering 
in of the Gospel, and the outpouring of the Holy 
Ghost, with all their blessed results, were but the 
fulfillment of all God had promised in his covenant 
and oath. 



THE ABRAHAMIC COYENANT. 57 



SECTION IV. 

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN" THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT AND THE 
CEREMONIAL LAW OF MOSES. 

The great error of Mr. Campbell and other anti- 
pedobaptists, consists in regarding the Sinaitic as a 
final development of the Abrahamie covenant, and 
in supposing that both were abolished together at 
the end of the Jewish dispensation. We will now 
proceed to show that they were entirely-different 
and distinct documents. 

1. They differ in character. The covenant was 
elemental and perpetual; while the law was legisla- 
tive, ceremonial, and temporal. By elemental, we 
mean that the covenant contained a few primary 
principles relating to what God obligated himself to 
do for his people, and their relation and duty to him 
and each other. By perpetual, we mean that these 
principles were to extend through all time, and eter- 
nity also, ramifying in their progressive fulfillment 
into an infinite variation of duties on the one hand, 
and of blessings on the other. 

By the law, we mean not the moral, but the cere- 
monial law of Moses; and by it being legislative, 
that in accordance with the constitution previously 
adopted, the legislative power of the Church adopted 
such a religious directory for the benefit of the 
Church as its present circumstances required; and 
by it being temporal, that the entire code was subject 



58 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

to alteration, amendment, or abrogation by the 
same legislative power in the Church. 

While Israel were on their journey from Egypt 
to Canaan, they fell into numerous grievous sins. 
And as the covenant was too elemental to specify 
with sufficient clearness and force to the groveling 
minds of the people what was pleasing or displeas- 
ing to Jehovah, Moses was called up into the mount- 
ain, and received from God himself both the moral 
and ceremonial law — the latter specifying, in a 
multitude of cases, moral and relative duties; and 
also containing a directory of Divine worship, bind- 
ing only till Christ, the promised seed, should come, 
when the moral law was re-enacted by the Savior — 
Matthew v, 17, 18 — and the ceremonial exchanged 
for laws more suitable to the dispensation of the 
Gospel — Hebrews ix, 8-14. The difference between 
the Abrahamic covenant and the ceremonial law of 
Moses, is portrayed by St. Paul — Gal. iv, 22-31 — 
by a striking allegory, in which the spiritual, per- 
manent, and evangelical character of the provisions 
of the covenant are held in contrast with the tem- 
porary, oppressive, and obsolete ceremonies of the 
law, by comparing the former to Sarah, the u free- 
woman,^ and mother of Isaac, and the latter to 
"Agar," or "Hagar," Abraham's "bond-woman," 
and mother of Ishmael. He says, " For it is writ- 
ten, that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond- 
maid, the other by a free-woman. But he who was 
of the bond-woman, was born after the flesh; but 
he of the free-woman was by promise. Which 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 59 

things are an allegory: for these are the two cov- 
enants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gen- 
dereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar 
is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusa- 
lem which now is, [present unbelieving Jews adher- 
ing to the law of Moses,] and is in bondage with 
her children. But Jerusalem which is above is 
free, [the Church,] which is the mother of us all. 
For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest 
not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: 
for the desolate hath many more children than she 
which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as 
Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as 
then he that was born after the flesh persecuted 
him that was born after the spirit, even so it is now. 
Nevertheless, what saith the Scripture ? Cast out 
the bond-woman and her son : for the son of the 
bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the 
free-woman. So then, brethren, we are not children 
of the bond-woman, but of the free." 

Abraham's believing seed, through Sarah and 
Isaac, is still perpetuated and blessed, as was prom- 
ised in the covenant made with Abraham. But as 
Hagar and Ishmael were not reckoned with that 
seed, and were " cast out," and in their rage perse- 
cuted the true seed, so the covenant made on Sinai 
with Moses constituted no part of the Abrahamic 
covenant, and had, like Hagar, been "cast out;" 
and the children of the law, who continued to ad- 
here to it, were engaged in persecuting the true 
seed. Thus are the law o£ Moses and the covenant 



60 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

made with. Abraham described as distinct and sepa- 
rate instruments, differing widely in character. 

2. They differed in design. We have already, at 
considerable length, examined the design of the 
Abrahamic covenant. That instrument, as we have 
shown, was designed to be a permanent constitution 
for the Church of God. All of its provisions, except- 
ing a few temporal, conditional, and typical prom- 
ises, which have ceased to be operative, continue 
the same through all time. We will now examine 
the design of the law of Moses. Eev. F. G. Hib- 
bard, in a recent work on infant baptism, makes the 
following suggestions: "We are not to suppose that 
all the laws enumerated and enjoined in the Mosa- 
ical code took their origin at the date of that code. 
How many of the same were known and practiced 
by the patriarchs we can not tell; but that many 
were no more than republications of more ancient, 
or even primitive laws, handed clown by tradition, 
we have the fullest evidence. Thus it was with the 
Sabbath day, with bloody and unbloody sacrifices, 
with the distinctions of clean and unclean beasts. " 

Moses evidently compiled, increased, and im- 
proved the Jewish code and ritual; and his object 
in so doing, or of the Almighty in doing it through 
him, is briefly stated by St. Paul — Gal. iii, 24 — 
¥ Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring 
us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. " 
Commenting on this passage Dr. Clarke says, u The 
law was our schoolmaster. x O vopos TtcuBwyczyos yj^v 
ysyovsv sis x^d'tov. The law was our pedagogue unto 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 61 

Christ. The rftuSoycoyoj — pedagogue — is not the 
schoolmaster, but the servant who had the care of 
the children, to lead thern to and bring them back 
from school, and had the care of them out of school 
hours. Thus, the law did not teach us the living, 
saving knowledge, but by rites and ceremonies, and 
especially by its sacrifices, it directed us to Christ, 
that we might be justified by faith. This is a 
beautiful metaphor, and highly illustrative of the 
apostle's doctrine." 

Rom. x, 4 : St. Paul says, " For Christ is the end 
of the law for righteousness to every one that be- 
lieveth." On this passage Dr. Clarke remarks, 
u Where the law ends, Christ begins. The law ends 
with representative sacrifices; Christ begins with 
the real offering. . . . Christ as an atoning sacrifice 
for sin, was the grand object of the whole sacrificial 
code of Moses." A late eloquent author has said, 
" Sacrifices were appointed; and that wonderful 
course of sacrificial offerings kept in operation for 
so many centuries, was designed to set forth and 
typify Christ, i the Lamb slain from the foundation 
of the world/ The seed of Abraham must be 
preserved distinct, because in his seed all the fam- 
ilies of the earth were to be blessed ; the Jews must 
not intermingle with other people, because 'of them, 
as pertaining to the flesh, Christ must come/ The 
deliverance of the Hebrew nation from Egyptian 
bondage was significant of another deliverance by 
an infinitely -higher deliverer than Moses; and the 
rock smitten at Horeb, from which gushed out a 



62 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

stream sufficient to satiate a thirsty people in a 
parched land, was significant of Christ; for that 
rock, St. Paul says, was Christ smitten for us. And 
then the serpent of brass, which by Divine appoint- 
ment was upraised on the top of a pole in the wil- 
derness, that the bitten and dying Israelite might 
be healed, was significant of Him who, in the full- 
ness of time, was to be lifted up 'for the healing 
of the nations/ These, and similar events and cir- 
cumstances, encouraged the faith and strengthened 
the hope of the people of God from age to age, till 
at last all these things ripened into actual events, 
and the Son of God became incarnate, and lived in 
the world and suffered death in it. . . . And now, 
ye harbingers of the cross, ye may retire, for your 
end is fulfilled; altars, ye need no longer stream 
with the blood of slain victims, for ' Christ our 
passover' is actually offered up; and ye stars, that 
somewhat dimly illuminated the moral hemisphere, 
under the preceding dispensation, may disappear, 
for the 'Sun of righteousness ' has burst forth upon 
our world, and while he is in the world, he is the 
'light of the world/ And thus we see the mean- 
ing of St. Paul when he said, 'The law is our 
schoolmaster to bring us to Christ/ M 

But the law of Moses, with its numerous sacri- 
fices, was also designed to impress the minds of the 
Israelites with the purity of the character of God, 
and of his worship, as well as to teach them the im- 
portance of personal purity enjoyed by his wor- 
shipers. 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 63 

A late anonymous author makes the following ap- 
propriate remarks upon this point: "At the period 
of the deliverance from Egypt, every nation by 
which they were surrounded worshiped unholy be- 
ings. Now, how were the Jews to be extricated 
from this difficulty, and made to understand and 
feel the influence of the holy character of God? 
The Egyptian idolatry in which they had mingled 
was beastly and lustful; and one of their first acts 
of disobedience, after their deliverance, shows that 
their minds were still dark and their propensities 
corrupt. The golden calf which they desired should 
be erected for them, was not designed as an act of 
apostasy from Jehovah, who had delivered them from 
Egyptian servitude. When the image was made, it 
was proclaimed to be that God which brought them 
up out of the land of Egypt; and when the procla- 
mation of a feast, or idolatrous debauch, was issued 
by Aaron, it was denominated a feast not to Isis, or 
Osiris, but a feast to Jehovah ; and as such they held 
it. Exodus xxxii, 4, 5. But they offered to the holy 
Jehovah the unholy worship of the idols of Egypt. 
Thus they manifested their ignorance of the holi- 
ness of his nature, as well as the corruption of their 
hearts. . . . The plan to originate the idea [of 
holiness] must consist of a series of compari- 
sons. ... In the outset, the animals of Pales- 
tine were divided, by command of Jehovah, into 
clean and unclean; in this way a distinction was 
made, and the one class, in comparison with the 
other, was deemed to be of a purer and better kind. 



64 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

From the class thus distinguished, as more pure 
than the other, was one selected to offer as a sacrifice. 
It was not only chosen from clean beasts, but, as an 
individual, it was to be without spot or blemish. 
Thus it was, in their eyes, purer than the other 
class, and purer than other individuals of its own 
class. This sacrifice the people were not deemed 
worthy in their own person to offer unto Jehovah ; 
but it was to be offered by a class of men who were 
distinguished from their brethren, purified and set 
apart for the service of the priest's office. Thus 
the idea of purity originated from two sources ; the 
purified priest, and the pure animal purified, were 
united in the offering of the sacrifice. But before 
the sacrifice could be offered, it was washed with 
clean water, and the priest had, in some cases, to 
wash himself, and officiate without his sandals. 
Thus when one process of comparison after another 
had attached the idea of superlative purity to the 
sacrifice, in offering it to Jehovah, in order that the 
contrast between the purity of God and the highest 
degrees of earthly purity might be seen, neither 
priest, people, nor sacrifice was deemed sufficiently 
pure to come into his presence, but was offered in 
the court without the holy of holies. In this man- 
ner, by a process of comparison, the character of 
God, in point of purity, was placed infinitely above 
themselves and their sacrifices." (Philosophy of the 
Plan of Salvation, pp. 71-76.) 

Thus it appears that the design of the ceremonial 
law of Moses was to teach the Israelites, under that 



THE ABRAHAMIG COVENANT. 65 

dark dispensation, the sacrificial character of Christ, 
the pure and holy character of Jehovah, and the 
purity of the worship he required; and all for the 
purpose of elevating, enlightening, and purifying 
the minds and hearts of the worshipers of the true 
God. 

3. They differed in durability. The ceremonial 
law of Moses was abolished by Jesus Christ at his 
crucifixion, without detriment to the Abrahamic 
covenant, and was succeeded by the Christian code. 

Mr. Campbell says, that "some eight hundred 
years after its establishment, Jeremiah foretold that 
it [the Abrahamic covenant] should be abolished, 
and that God should make a new covenant." Mr. 
C. did not tell us where in Jeremiah we could find 
such a prophecy; but we suppose he must refer to 
Jeremiah xxxi, 31-33, which reads as follows : "Be- 
hold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make 
a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with 
the house of Judah; not according to the covenant 
that I made with their fathers, in the day xhat I 
took them by the hand to bring them out of the 
land of Egypt, (which my covenant they brake,) 
although I was an husband unto them, saith the 
Lord. But this shall be the covenant that I will 
make with the house of Israel : After those days, 
saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward 
parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their 
God, and they shall be my people." St. Paul quotes 
and explains the above passage as follows — Heb. viii, 
5-10 — "Moses was admonished of God when he 
5 



66 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

was about to make the tabernacle; for see, saith he, 
that thou make all things according to the pattern 
shown to thee in the mount. But now hath he ob- 
tained a more excellent ministry, by how much also 
he is a mediator of a better covenant, which was 
established on better promises. For if that first 
covenant had been faultless, then should no place 
have been sought for a second. For finding fault 
with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith 
the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with 
the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah; 
not according to the covenant that I made with 
their fathers, in the day when I took them by the 
hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt. . . . 
For this is the covenant that I will make with the 
house of Israel, after those days, saith the Lord; I 
will put my laws in their mind, and write them in 
their hearts ; and I will be to them a God, and they 
shall be to me a people." Our object in quoting 
both Jeremiah and St. Paul at length is, that the 
reader might see without difficulty what covenants 
are referred to by these writers, and with whom 
both were made. 

1. The covenant called the first, is called so only 
because it was made before the one called the sec- 
ond, and not because of its being the first ever made. 
Jeremiah says it was the covenant made with the 
" house of Israel, and with the house of Judah," 
and not with Abraham their father ; and that it was 
made when the Lord " took them by the hand to 
bring them out of the land of Egypt," which was 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 67 

"four hundred and thirty years after " the covenant 
was made with Abraham. St. Paul is still more 
precise as to the date of this first covenant. He 
says it was made when Moses was in the mount, 
receiving directions for the building of the taber- 
nacle. And in the first verse of the ninth chapter 
he says, that this "first covenant had also ordinan- 
ces of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary." 
There can be no doubt, I think, but that both Jer- 
emiah and St. Paul had reference to the ceremonial 
law of Moses contained in the books of Exodus and 
Leviticus, as the first covenant, which was to be 
succeeded by a better one. 

2. The new covenant, which all admit to be the 
Christian code, in which is found a better and more 
spiritual, and less burdensome directory of religious 
worship, and which did succeed this first covenant 
by Divine appointment, was also made "with the 
house of Israel, and with the house of Judah" — a 
very striking and forcible argument in favor of the 
continuance of the Church of the patriarchs in an 
improved form down through the Christian dispen- 
sation. Thus the reader must see, that not one par- 
ticle of testimony is furnished in the above proph- 
ecy of Jeremiah in favor of Mr. Campbell's theory 
that the covenant of Abraham should be abolished; 
but the evidence, so far as it reaches the Abrahamic 
covenant, is directly to the contrary. It was the 
covenant made with Moses while on the mount that 
was abolished, and succeeded by a second, a new, and 
a better covenant. 



68 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

The time when it was abolished, as well as the 
manner, are thus described by St. Paul — Eph. ii, 
15 — "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, 
even the law of commandments contained in ordi- 
nances;" Col. ii, 14, "Blotting out the handwriting 
of ordinances that was against us, which was con- 
trary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to 
the cross." And that the abolition of the law did 
not disannul the Abrahamic covenant, is positively 
asserted by the same apostle — Gral. iii, 17 — "And 
this I say, that the covenant that was confirmed be- 
fore of Grod in Christ, the law, which was four hun- 
dred and thirty years after, can not disannul, that it 
should make the promise of none effect." Thus we 
have the law abolished, and a new Christian code 
established in its stead, but the covenant left unaf- 
fected by the change, and all its gracious and spirit- 
ual promises still secure to Abraham's numerous 
spiritual seed, composed of all that are Christ's. 
And here we will conclude this section, having 
proven, I think, in this and preceding sections, that 
the covenant made with Abraham was a spiritual 
covenant, containing the permanent constitution of 
the Church of God in all subsequent ages. 



THE ABKAHAMIC COVENANT. 



SECTION V. 

THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST WAS ORGANIZED IN THE FAMILY OF 

ABRAHAM, AND FOUNDED UPON THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT 

HAS BEEN PERPETUATED, AND WELL BE FOREVER, AND 
CONSTITUTES THE TRUE " SEED OF ABRAHAM." 

The word ecclesia, commonly translated Church 
in the New Testament, is in the Old translated con- 
gregation, or assembly. Dr. Clarke says, "The word 
ekklesia simply means an assembly, or congregation, 
the nature of which is to be understood from connect- 
ing circumstances ; for the word ekklesia, as well as 
the terms congregation and assembly, may be applied 
to any concourse of people, good or bad, gathered 
together for lawful or unlawful purposes; hence it 
is used — Acts xix, 32 — for the mob or confused 
rabble gathered together against Paul. . . . The 
Greek word sxx%yj6ia seems to be derived from 
exxoXsco, to call out of, or from; that is, an assem- 
bly gathered out of a multitude, and must have 
some other word joined to it to determine its nature; 
namely, The Church of God} the congregation col- 
lected by God, and devoted to his service." (See 
Clarke's comments on Matthew xvi, concluding re- 
marks.) 

We have no obj ection to the above rule of determ- 
ining the meaning of the term ekklesia, providing 
it is applied to both Testaments ; for we are unwill- 
ing to give any signification to this term in the New 
Testament that it will not bear with equal propriety 



70 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

in the Old. Instance — 1 Cor. i, 2 — "Unto the 
Church of God which is at Corinth, to them that 
are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints/' 
etc. This was the Church of God, composed of 
persons " sanctified in Christ Jesus/' and u called to 
be saints. " He, therefore, evidently uses the term 
ekklesia in its primary and spiritual signification. 
Well, this is all we ask in the Old Testament foi 
this term. We admit that ekklesia is there some- 
times used to describe Israel only as a civil or polit- 
ical association; for in Israel the civil and eccle- 
siastical governments were united. Israel was a 
theocracy; all of her laws, whether civil or relig- 
ious, came from God; and in general, the same 
officers were charged with the administration of 
both; and the congregation of Israel was sometimes 
convened for political, and sometimes for religious 
purposes, and sometimes both: hence, it is not 
strange that the terms congregation or Church 
should sometimes be applied to Israel in its civil or 
political capacity. But what we intend here to 
prove is this, that these terms were so applied to 
the Israelites, as to imply that they constituted, in 
the highest spiritual sense of the term, the Church 
of Jesus Christ. 

David says — Psalm xxii, 22 — U I will declare thy 
name unto my brethren : in the midst of the con- 
gregation [Church] will I praise thee." To show 
that we have rendered the above passage right, we 
will refer to St. Paul, who has quoted it in the 
same way — Heb. ii ; 12 — " Saying, I will declare thy 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 71 

name unto my brethren : in the midst of the Church 
will I sing praise unto thee." And to whom the 
Psalmist referred by the term Church will be seen 
in the verse immediately following : "Ye that fear 
the Lord ; praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glo- 
rify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel." 
The pious among the "seed of Israel," constitute 
the Church, in the midst of which the devout 
Psalmist promised to "praise" the Lord. And, 
again, in the twenty-fifth verse, "My praise shall be 
of thee in the great congregation : [or Church :] I 
will pay my vows before them that fear him." Now, 
if we are to determine the signification of the term 
Church by the connection in which it is used, cer- 
tainly David uses it in its highest spiritual sense ; 
for the persons to whom he applied it were his 
"brethren," the "seed of Israel," who "feared the 
Lord;" and he uses it too in connection with the 
highest religious devotions, which were to occur in 
the Church. Why, then, shall we not understand 
this term when used by David, just as we do when 
St. Paul uses it in relation to the "sanctified in 
Christ Jesus," " called to be saints," etc., at 
Corinth ? 

But let us examine a few more places, where 
ekklesia is rendered congregation in the Old Testa- 
ment. Joshua viii, 34, 35: "And afterward he 
read all the words of the law, the blessings and the 
cursings, according to all that is written in the book 
of the law. There was not a word of all that 
Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before 



72 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

all the congregation of Israel;" 2 Ghron. xxix, 28, 
"And all the congregation worshiped, and the sing- 
ers sang, and the trumpeters sounded : and all this 
continued until the burnt-offering was finished." 
In both of the above instances, which are only pro- 
duced as examples out of a vast number that might 
be adduced, the congregation is spoken of only in 
its religious character, engaged most devoutly in 
the worship of the great Jehovah according to his 
word. 

Mr. Cruden says that u Church signifies a relig- 
ious assembly, selected and called out of the world 
by the doctrine of the Gospel, to worship the true 
God in Christ according to his word." Now, if Mr. 
Cruden gives us the true primary meaning of the 
word Churchy which I think no person will pretend 
to deny, whatever secondary or accommodated mean- 
ing he may attach to it, then certainly in the 
above Scriptures we have the Church of God de- 
scribed in the clearest possible manner; for there 
we have an u assembly selected and called out of the 
[Gentile] world, by the doctrines of the Gospel," 
as preached to Abraham — Gal. iii, 8 — and " called 
out to worship the true God in Christ." But, in 
order to clear away every doubt that may linger upon 
this subject, we will examine each point by itself in 
detail. 

1. The constitution of the Church was made, the 
Church organized, built up, protected, and blessed 
by Jesus Christ, the great founder and builder of 
the Church of God upon the earthy which St. Ste- 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. <3 

plien denominates u the Church in the wilderness/' 
Acts vii, 25. We have elsewhere proven ; and we 
need not here repeat the evidence, that it was "God 
in Christ " that formed and entered into the cove- 
nant with Abraham concerning his seed, which con- 
stituted " the Church in the wilderness. " For 
further information in relation to what Christ did 
for that " Church in the wilderness, see Heb. iii, 
1-6 : " Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the 
heavenly calling, consider the apostle and high- 
priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; who was 
faithful to him that appointed him, as also Mo- 
ses was faithful in all his house. For this man 
[Christ] was counted worthy of more glory than 
Moses, inasmuch as he who hath buiided the house, 
hath more honor than the house. [Christ c buiided 
the house/ which constituted 'the Church in the 
wilderness/] For every house is buiided by some 
man; but he that built all things is God. And 
Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a serv- 
ant, for a testimony of those things which were to 
be spoken after; but Christ as a son over his own 
house : [that house which Christ built, and consti- 
tuted 'the Church in the wilderness:,] whose house 
are we, [Hebrews converted to Christ,] if we hold 
fast the confidence, and the rejoicing of the hope 
firm unto the end." The plain meaning of the 
apostle Paul, taken in connection with the declara- 
tion of St. Stephen, is, that Christ built "the 
Church in the wilderness," in which Moses acted as 
a faithful servant, and that Christ's relation to that 



74 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Church, was more honorable and glorious, because 
he built it, and therefore it was his own Church. 

Again: St. Paul, speaking of Moses leaving the 
court of Pharaoh, says — Heb. xi, 26 — -"He es- 
teemed the reproach of Christ greater riches than 
the treasures of Egypt." Now, in what way did 
Moses show his esteem for the reproach of Christ in 
Egypt ? The answer is exceedingly plain and easy 
after what the apostle had before written. Christ's 
people, or Church, was then in Egypt, suffering 
reproach for Christ's sake. And whatever Christ's 
people suffer for his sake, he regards as his own suf- 
fering. " Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the 
least of these ye have done it unto me/' is as true 
when they are reproached by their enemies, as when 
they are "administered" unto by friends. And 
Moses chose to unite himself with, and become a 
sharer of their reproachful sufferings, rather than 
to enjoy all the riches of Pharaoh. Hence, he suf- 
fered "the reproach of Christ." The same apostle, 
speaking of the passage of the children of Israel 
through the Red Sea, and through the wilderness, 
says — 1 Cor. x, 4 — u For they drank of that rock that 
followed them; and that rock was Christ." So it ap- 
pears that Christ "followed" his people through the 
sea and the wilderness, furnishing them with that 
"spiritual drink" which "endureth unto everlast- 
ing life," and is figuratively called a rock, because 
it was from a literal rock, smitten by Moses, that 
they received water to drink. 

Again: he says — in the ninth verse — "Neither 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 75 

let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted/' 
etc. Now, we have proven that the Israelites con- 
stituted " Christ's own house;" that the " reproach " 
suffered by this people, while in Egypt, was u the 
reproach of Christ," in such a sense as to imply 
that they were his people ; that he followed the Is- 
raelites through the Bed Sea and through the wil- 
derness, furnishing them with that "spiritual wa- 
ter" which "endureth unto eternal life;" and the 
compact thus organized, "built up," blessed, and 
protected by Christ, is called the "Church in the 
wilderness," the assembly, or " congregation of the 
Lord," etc. From all this we gather this simple 
fact; namely, The seed of Abraham constituted the 
true Church of Jesus Christ. 

2. Christ called Abraham and his seed out from 
among the Gentiles, and placed them in the land of 
Canaan for religious purposes. Heb. xi, 8-10 : "By 
faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a 
place which he should after receive for an inherit- 
ance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither 
he went. By faith he sojourned in the land of 
promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in taber- 
nacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of 
the same promise J for he looked for a city which 
hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God." 
Every sentence in this passage goes to show the en- 
tirely-religious character of the object of Abra- 
ham's pursuit, in migrating to the land of Canaan. 
Moses says, "And the Lord said unto me, Arise, 
take thy journey before the people, that they may 



76 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

go in and possess the land, which I sware unto their 
fathers to give unto them. And now, Israel, what 
doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to fear 
the Lord thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to 
love him, and to love the Lord thy God with all thy 
heart, and with all thy soul?" Deut. x, 11, 12; " Ye 
are the children of the Lord your God; ye shall not 
cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your 
eyes for the dead. For thou art a holy people unto 
the Lord thy God, and the Lord hath chosen thee 
to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the 
nations that are upon the earth," Deut. xiv, 1, 2; 
"For thou art a holy people unto the Lord thy God; 
the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special 
people unto himself, above all people that are upon 
the face of the earth. The Lord did not set his 
love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more 
in number than any people ; for ye were the fewest 
of all people; but because the Lord loved you, and 
because he would keep the oath which he had sworn 
unto your fathers, hath the Lord brought you out 
with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the 
house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh, 
king of Egypt. . . . Wherefore it shall come to 
pass, if ye hearken to these judgments, and keep 
and do them, that the Lord thy God shall keep unto 
thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware 
unto thy fathers," Deut. vii, 6-12. The above is 
but a brief specimen of what might be brought to 
establish this point. 

3. The Lord Jesus Christ revealed his righteous 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 77 

and holy will to this people; in which is found the 
best and most perfect condensed system of morals 
the world has ever contained, and is the very system 
which Christ fifteen hundred years after reaffirmed 
to be the system by which his Church should con- 
tinue to be governed, when he said — Matt, v, 17, 
18 — " Think not that I am come to destroy the law 
or the prophets \ I am not come to destroy, but to 
fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and 
earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass 
from the law till all be fulfilled." The law must be 
the moral law of Moses — Exod. xx — which contains 
ten commandments, written by the finger of God 
upon "two tables of stone." The first four are sup- 
posed to have been upon the first stone, and were de- 
signed to teach man his duty to his God; and the 
last six, upon the second stone, to teach to man 
his duty to man. These ten commandments the 
holy prophets ramify and apply to all the various 
actions of human life; so that men might under- 
stand at all times what actions are pleasing and what 
displeasing to God. 

The Savior indorses and re-establishes both the 
law and the expositions of it by the prophets. And 
thus, while the covenant contains a permanent con- 
stitution for the Church, the moral law of Moses 
furnishes an equally-permanent code of morals. 

Christ not only re-established the moral law, but 
he explained its spiritual import — Matt, xxii, 37- 
40— "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy 
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 



78 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

This is the first great commandment/' contained on 
the first table of stone. "And the second is like 
unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 
On these two commandments hang all the law and 
the prophets. " 

4. The Lord Jesus revealed to the holy proph- 
ets, from Moses to Malachi, the principal doctrinal 
truths of his Gospel, a belief of which was essen- 
tial to salvation. And these doctrines were further 
explained by Christ and his apostles in the New 
Testament. 

So far, then, as doctrinal truth is concerned, the 
Church of God in the old dispensation was in pos- 
session of all the essential elements; so much so 
that many of them possessed an evangelical faith, 
which would have been creditable to a brighter dis- 
pensation. 

5. The Lord Jesus furnished for his Church in 
the old dispensation a directory for religious worship, 
appropriate to the dispensation for which it was de- 
signed, and arranged all the paraphernalia necessary 
for a typical worship. A tabernacle was erected 
according to a plan of his own showing in the mount. 
A class of ministering priests were consecrated for 
the services of the tabernacle, and to conduct divine 
worship. Every animal to be offered in sacrifice, as 
well as the mode of offering them, was pointed out. 
Religious ordinances, such as the paschal supper, 
etc., were instituted and made obligatory upon the 
entire membership of his Church. 

And finally, the same Lord Jesus, as supreme 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 79 

legislator for the Church, abolished the law contain- 
ing all these ordinances and institutions, and en- 
acted other laws containing other ordinances and 
institutions, better adapted to the worship of the 
same Deity through the same mediator, to be ob- 
served by the same Church down through the dis- 
pensation of the Gospel to the end of the world. 

Now, let the reader take all these facts and com- 
bine them together, and see if they do not prove 
that the true Church of Jesus Christ was organ- 
ized in the family of Abraham, and made to con- 
sist of Abraham's seed, and placed permanently 
upon the Abrahamic covenant as the charter of its 
blessings and privileges. 



SECTION VI. 

THE PERPETUITY OF THE CHURCH ORGANIZED IN" THE FAMILY OF 
ABRAHAM, AS FORETOLD BY THE HOLY PROPHETS. 

We will now search among the prophets, and see 
what opinion prevailed among these inspired men, 
in relation to the Church of God to which they be- 
longed, and which had then existed since the days 
of Abraham. 

Did they predict its overthrow, or its perpetuation 
and prosperity, by the coming of Messiah ? They 
did, to be sure, predict the overthrow of the Jewish 
nation, polity, and city, in consequence of their pre- 
vailing wickedness and unbelief. But how was this 



80 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

all to effect the covenant and Church of the patri- 
archs and prophets? We will commence with 
Moses — Deut. xxxiii, 29 — " Happy art thou, Is- 
rael. Who is like unto thee, people saved of the 
Lord, the shield of thy help, and who is the sword 
of thy excellency! And thine enemies shall be 
found liars unto thee, and thou shalt tread upon 
their high places." We will not afflict the feelings 
of the modern enemies of Israel, by an application 
of the above language to them. Let it only be ap- 
plied to the hostile Gentile nations, ancient and mod- 
ern, which have sought the overthrow of Israel, and 
you have a prophecy as truthful and immutable as 
God, securing victory and salvation to Israel through 
all succeeding time. 

Isaiah — xlix, 13-17 — says : " Sing, heavens, and 
be joyful, earth, and break forth into singing, 
mountains, for the Lord hath comforted his people, 
and will have mercy upon his afflicted. But Zion 
said, The Lord hath forsaken me. Can a woman 
forget her sucking child, that she should not have 
compassion on the son of her womb? Yea, they 
may forget, yet will not I forget thee. Behold, I 
have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; 
thy walls are continually before me. Thy children 
shall make haste; thy destroyers, and they that 
made thee waste, shall go forth of thee." 

The prophet does not speak, in the above lan- 
guage, of individuals, or it would go far to prove 
unconditional and personal election; a doctrine in 
proof of which it is often improperly quoted. It is 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 81 

"Zion" that speaks of being "forsaken," and to 
whom the Lord replies, in language pledging to her, 
in her corporate capacity, unchanging love, protec- 
tion, and prosperity; only, however, securing per- 
sonally the blessings promised to such as maintained 
their spiritual connection with her. And for this 
fidelity on the part of the Lord, the " heavens" and 
the "earth" are called upon to "sing" and be 
"joyful." 

Again : Isaiah xliii, 1-7, " But now thus said the 
Lord that created thee, Jacob, and he that formed 
thee, Israel, Fear not : for I have redeemed thee, 
I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine. 
When thou passest through the waters, I will be 
with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not 
overflow thee : when thou walkest through the fire, 
thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame 
kindle upon thee. For I am the Lord thy God, the 
Holy One of Israel, thy Savior : I gave Egypt for 
thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. Since 
thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been hon- 
orable, and I have loved thee : therefore will I give 
men for thee, and people for thy life. Fear not; 
for I am with thee : I will bring thy seed from the 
east, and gather thee from the west : I will say to 
the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not 
back : bring my sons from afar, and my daughters 
from the ends of the earth; even every one that is 
called by my name : for I have created him for my 
glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him." 
Now, all this is spoken of "Jacob," or of "Israel;" 
6 



82 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

evidently referring to the "seed" of Israel, and 
that, too, a spiritual seed, composed of such as be- 
lieved in and worshiped the God of Israel, whether 
Jew or Gentiles, with perhaps their infant offspring. 
They were such as the Lord had "redeemed," and 
"called," and said, "Thou art mine/' And this 
spiritual Israel God promises to preserve, though 
they should pass through "waters," even "through 
the rivers," and "through the fire" — figures indi- 
cating the severest afflictions. And her numbers 
were to be increased by bringing her "seed" from 
the "east," "west," "north," and "south," and by 
bringing "sons from far," and "daughters from the 
ends of the earth" — figures of speech indicating 
the most extensive ingathering of Gentiles, even 
those of the greatest distance from the land of 
Judah. Again: see Isaiah xliv, 1-5, "Yet now 
hear, Jacob, my servant; and Israel, whom I 
have chosen : thus saith the Lord that made thee, 
and formed thee from the womb, which will help 
thee; Fear not, Jacob, my servant; and thou, 
Jeshurun, whom I have chosen. For I will pour 
water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the 
dry ground : I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, 
and my blessing upon thine offspring: and they 
shall spring up as among the grass, as willows by 
the water-courses. One shall say, I am the Lord's; 
and another shall call himself by the name of 
Jacob; and another shall subscribe with his hand 
unto the Lord, and surname himself by the name 
of Israel:" 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 83 

Here the facts for which we contend are as plain 
as language can make them. It is the "seed" of 
" Jacob" on which the Spirit of heaven shall be 
"poured/' and the "offspring" of "Israel" that 
shall be "blessed." And this seed shall be multi- 
plied, not by natural births, but by pouring out his 
Spirit like "floods upon the ground/' and causing 
the seed of Jacob to " spring up as willows among 
the water-courses." 

Nor will it answer to say, in reply, that the proph- 
ets also predicted severe punishments upon Jacob, 
and, indeed, the entire overthrow of Israel. Such 
punishments were only threatened upon the de- 
scendants of Israel, when, by sin, they should forfeit 
the Divine blessing and cease to constitute the spir- 
itual seed of Israel. But in the midst of all such 
threatened punishments upon the rebellious in 
Israel, God promised protection and prosperity to 
the spiritual seed of Jacob, even if Gentiles had to 
constitute that seed. An instance of this is found 
in Isaiah xlix, 18-23, "Lift up thine eyes round 
about, and behold : all these gather themselves 
together, and come to thee. As I live, saith the 
Lord, thou shalt surely clothe thee with them all, 
as with an ornament, and bind them on thee, as a 
bride doeth. For thy waste and thy desolate places, 
and the land of thy destruction, [Israel is to con- 
tinue to exist, and to receive multitudes from afar, 
after her 'places' had become 'desolate/ and her 
'land' was destroyed by the 'loss' of her natural 
'children/] shall even now be too narrow by reason 



84 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

of the inhabitants, and they that swallowed thee up 
shall be far away. The children which thou shalt 
have, after thou hast lost the other, shall say again 
in thine ears, The place is too strait for me : give 
place to me that I may dwell. Then shalt thou say 
in thy heart, Who hath begotten me these, seeing I 
have lost my children; and am desolate, a captive, 
and removing to and fro ? and who hath brought up 
these? Behold I was left alone; these, where had 
they been ? ' Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I 
will lift up my hand to the Gentiles, and set up my 
standard to the people : and they shall bring thy 
sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be car- 
ried upon their shoulders. And kings shall be thy 
nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing moth- 
ers : they shall bow down to thee with their face 
toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; 
and thou shalt know that I am the Lord : for they 
shall not be ashamed that wait for me." 

It was to the Gentiles the Lord was to look to 
replenish the seed of Israel, after the loss of her 
national children. For further light upon this sub- 
ject we turn next to Isaiah li, 2-6: "Look unto 
Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare 
you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and 
increased him. For the Lord shall comfort Zion : 
he will comfort all her waste places; and he will 
make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like 
the garden of the Lord; joy and gladness shall be 
found therein, thanksgiving, and the voice of mel- 
ody. Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 85 

unto me, my nation : for a law shall proceed from 
me, and I will make my judgment to rest for a light 
of the people. My righteousness is near; my sal- 
vation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the 
people; the isles shall wait upon nie, and on mine 
arms shall they trust. Lift up your eyes to the 
heavens, and look upon the earth beneath : for the 
heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth 
shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell 
therein shall die in like manner : but my salvation 
shall be forever, and my righteousness shall not be 
abolished." 

Yery similar to the above is the following — Isaiah 
lii, 9, 10 — "Break forth into joy, sing together, ye 
waste places of Jerusalem : for the Lord hath com- 
forted his people, he hath redeemed Jerusalem. 
The Lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes 
of all the nations: and all the ends of the earth 
shall see the salvation of our God." 

Perhaps the reader may say that these prophecies 
all relate to the commencement of the dispensation 
of the Gospel, to the great and glorious revivals of 
religion which should then take place, and to the 
general ingathering of both Jews and Gentiles from 
all parts of the earth to the Church of Christ, as 
the result of those revivals. Truly, but that Church 
of Christ was the Zion of the prophet's day, com- 
posed of the seed of Jacob, and of the offspring of 
Israel, with Abraham and Sarah at its head; and 
this multiplication of members to the Church of 
Christ is the fulfillment of the promise to the patri- 



86 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

arelis, "Multiplying, I will multiply thee" We will 
next turn to Isaiah — liv, 1-10 — "Sing, barren, 
thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, 
and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child ; 
for more are the children of the desolate than the 
children of the married wife, saith the Lord." Be- 
fore quoting farther from the prophet, let me here 
introduce a note from Dr. Clarke on the above. He 
says, " The Church of God under the Old Testament, 
confined within the narrow bounds of the Jewish 
nation, and still more so in respect of the very small 
number of true believers, and which sometimes 
seemed to be deserted of God her husband, is the 
barren woman that did not hear, and was desolate. 
She is exhorted to rejoice, and to express her joy in 
the strongest manner, on the reconciliation of her 
husband — see verse 6 — and on the accession of the 
Gentiles to her family. The converted Gentiles are 
all along considered \>y the prophet as a new acces- 
sion of adopted children, admitted into the original 
Church of God, and united with it." The prophet 
continues to say, " Enlarge the place of thy tent, 
and let them stretch forth the curtain of thy 
habitations; spare not, lengthen thy cords, and 
strengthen thy stakes ; for thou shalt break forth on 
the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall 
inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities 
to be inhabited. Fear not; for thou shalt not be 
ashamed : neither be thou confounded ; for thou 
shalt not be put to shame : for thou shalt forget the 
shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 87 

reproach of thy widowhood any more. For thy 
Maker is thy husband; the Lord of hosts is his 
name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; 
the God of the whole earth shall he be called. For 
the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and 
grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou 
wast refused, saith thy God. For a small moment 
have I forsaken thee ; but with great mercies will I 
gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from 
thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness 
will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Re- 
deemer. For this is as the waters of Noah unto 
me : for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah 
should no more go over the earth ; so have I sworn 
that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke 
thee. For the mountains shall depart, and the hills 
be removed ; but my kindness shall not depart from 
thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be 
removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee." 
It would be impossible, in my judgment, to em- 
ploy language that would more perfectly and uncon- 
ditionally secure the perpetuity of the Church of 
the Old Testament till the end of time; for, though 
"the mountains shall depart, and the hills be re- 
moved, my kindness shall not depart from thee, 
neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed." 
The same prophet says — Isaiah lx, 1-5 — " Arise, 
shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the 
Lord is risen upon thee. For behold, the darkness 
shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the peo- 
ple; but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his 



95 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

glory shall be seen upon thee. And the Gentiles 
shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness 
of thy rising. Lift up thine eyes round about, and 
see : all they gather themselves together, they come 
to thee; thy sons shall come from far, and thy 
daughters shall be nursed at thy side. Then thou 
shalt see, and flow together, and thy heart shall fear, 
and be enlarged; because the abundance of the sea 
shall be converted unto thee, the forces of the Gen- 
tiles shall come unto thee." When that prophecy 
is fulfilled, the Church, formed in Abraham's tent, 
on the plains of Mamre, will be in its millennial 
glory. When "the abundance of the sea," and the 
"forces of the Gentiles," are all converted and 
brought unto this Church, then truly the seed of 
Abraham will be equal in number to the stars that 
bespangle the blue vault of heaven. The prophet 
continues: "And the sons of strangers shall build 
up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto 
thee ; for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favor 
have I had mercy on thee. Therefore thy gates 
shall be open continually; they shall not be shut 
day nor night; that men may bring unto thee the 
forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be 
brought. For the nation and kingdom that will not 
serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be 
utterly wasted." Isaiah Ix, 10-12. 

I can never read the above passage without feel- 
ing thankful that I am not an anti-pedobaptist, and 
have never refused to serve the Church of the patri- 
arch to the best of my ability. But again : " The 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 89 

glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir-tree, 
the pine-tree, and the box together, to beautify the 
place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place 
of my feet glorious. The sons also of those that 
afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee : and all 
they that despised thee shall bow themselves down 
at the soles of thy feet; and they shall call thee the 
city of the Lord, the Zion of the Holy One of Is- 
rael." Isaiah lx, 13, 14. A very different name 
is usually given to that Church by anti-pedobaptists. 
He continues: " Whereas thou hast been forsaken 
and hated, so that no man went through thee, I will 
make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many gen- 
erations." Isaiah lx, 15. "An eternal excellency 
I will make thee." To that Church let me be at- 
tached. In the twenty-second verse he says, "A 
little one shall become a thousand, and a small one 
a strong nation : I the Lord will hasten it in his 
time." 

Lest there should be a remaining doubt in the 
mind of the reader, whether these sublime predic- 
tions related to the Church in existence before our 
Savior came in the flesh, I will here introduce the 
last verses of the preceding chapter — Isaiah lix, 20, 
21 — "And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and 
unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, 
saith the Lord. As for me, this is my cove- 
nant with them, saith the Lord," etc. "The Re- 
deemer shall come to Zion" He shall not come to a 
Churchless world; he shall come to the Zion he had 
himself created; "unto them that turn from trans- 



90 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

gression in Jacob /' and in doing so he shall con- 
form to his own covenant, which promised the Mes- 
siah should come from the "seed of Abraham/' 
of which this Zion was principally constituted. 

And this Zion, to which the Redeemer shall come, 
is the " city of the Lord, the Zion of the Holy One 
of Israel/' that was commanded to " arise and 
shine; for her light had come, and the glory of the 
Lord had risen upon her. And to whose 'light' 
the 'Gentiles shall come/ and 'kings to the bright- 
ness of her rising/ " And this same Zion was to 
be made an "eternal excellency" the "joy of many 
generations" And this is the "little one" which 
"shall become a thousand/' and the "small one/' 
which shall be a "strong nation/' 

The following will show the opinion of another 
eminent prophet, in relation to the perpetuation 
and prosperity of the Zion of the Old Testament, 
under the superior blessings promised in the new 
dispensation. Jeremiah iii, 14-18 : "Turn, back- 
sliding children, saith the Lord; for I am married 
unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and 
two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion : and 
I will give you pastors according to my heart, which 
shall feed you with knowledge and understanding. 
And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied 
and increased in the land, in those days, saith the 
Lord, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant 
of the Lord : [the dispensation to which it belonged 
being ended :] neither shall it come to mind : neither 
shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 91 

neither shall that be done any more. At that time 
they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the Lord; 
and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the 
name of the Lord, to Jerusalem : neither shall they 
walk any more after the imagination of their evil 
heart. In those days the house of Judah shall 
walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come 
together out of the land of the north to the land 
that I have given for an inheritance unto your fa- 
thers." I am aware that this prophecy is applied 
by some commentators to the return of the Israelites 
from Babylon. But when they then returned to 
Jerusalem, they rebuilt the temple, and reinstated 
the covenant which accompanied the ark, and revived 
its worship and ordinances. While in this return, 
the prophet assures us that " they shall say no more, 
The ark of the covenant of the Lord : neither shall 
it come to mind: neither shall they visit it; neither 
shall that be done any more;" language indicating 
the entire rejection of the law of Moses as their 
religious directory. 

After the closest attention we have been able to 
give to the subject, our opinion is, that God has 
promised a second return of the children of Israel, 
of which their return from Babylon was a type; the 
first being literal, but the second spiritual. And 
this second return of the Jews is to be produced by 
their conversion to Christ, which, however, will not 
take place till after the Gentiles shall generally 
have received the Gospel. And when so converted, 
they are to be brought into the same fold to which 



92 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

their fathers belonged, and which will still exist 
and be open for their reception; and the same 
covenant that was made with their father Abraham, 
with all its spiritual provisions fully developed, will 
still embrace them. This is not only the meaning 
of Jeremiah in the passage quoted, but is also the 
doctrine taught by Isaiah — xi, 10-12 — "And in 
that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall 
stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the 
Gentiles seek; and his rest shall be glorious. And 
it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall 
set his hand again the second time to recover the 
remnant of his people, which shall be left, from 
Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and 
from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and 
from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And 
he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall 
assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together 
the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the 
earth P St. Paul, speaking of the same subject, 
says — Horn, xi, 25-27 — "For I would not, brethren, 
that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, (lest ye 
should be wise in your own conceits,) that blindness 
in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of 
the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be 
saved; as it is written, There shall come out of Zion 
the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from 
Jacob; for this is my covenant unto them, when I 
shall take away their sins." 

Thus it appears that the same spiritual compact 
that was organized in the house and family of Abra- 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 93 

ham, acting under the Abrahaniic covenant as its 
charter, continues to exist at the present day; and 
into it the Gentiles are being brought from all quar- 
ters of the globe ; and into which the present out- 
casts of Israel are to be brought when converted to 
Christ by his Gospel; proving, as clear as language 
can make it, the perpetuity of the Church of the 
patriarchs. 



SECTION VII. 

WHAT CHRIST, AT HIS COMING, WAS TO DO TO THE CHURCH OF THE 
PATRIARCHS AND PROPHETS, WHICH HIMSELF HAD OR- 
GANIZED IN THE FAMILY OF ABRAHAM. 

John the Baptist, who was the forerunner, and 
proclaimed to the Jews the nature of Christ's mis- 
sion, said — Matt, iii, 9-12 — " And think not to say 
within yourselves, "We have Abraham to our father; 
for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones 
to raise up children unto Abraham. And now 
also the ax is laid unto the root of the trees; 
therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good 
fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. . . . 
Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly 
purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the gar- 
ner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquench- 
able fire." Now, these wicked Jews supposed that, 
being Abraham's natural seed, they were by that 
very relation entitled to all the blessings of the 



94 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Abrahamic covenant/ and privileges of the Church 
founded upon it. They had, in fact, embraced the 
very doctrine "that the blessings promised to Abra- 
ham and his natural seed throughout all their gen- 
erations/' whether temporal or spiritual, were theirs, 
"without any regard to their personal character, 
conduct, or faith." But John, it seems, duly ap- 
prised them that God was not dependent upon them 
to fulfill his promise to Abraham; that he was 
"able of these stones [a term they usually applied 
reproachfully to the Gentiles] to raise up children 
unto Abraham." He also admonishes them that 
their connection with the Church of Christ must 
depend wholly upon their faith and piety, and not 
upon their natural relation to the faithful patriarch. 
For the "ax was already laid at the root," which 
was to cut down every unfruitful tree; and John 
was sent to make one more faithful effort to save 
them from this calamity. If this failed, Christ, 
who was shortly to succeed him, would strike the 
fatal blow which would sever their connection with 
the Church of God, and thus destroy, at least, their 
spiritual connection with Abraham and his seed. 
He also held in his "hand" a winnowing "fan," 
with which he would "thoroughly purge" the 
"floor" of his Church, taking the good to heaven, 
and casting the bad into "fire unquenchable." 

This same doctrine is taught again by Christ him- 
self — Matt, viii, 11, 12 — "And I say unto you, that 
many shall come from the east and west, and shall 
sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 95 

tlie kingdom of heaven. But the children of the 
kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness ; there 
shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." The 
term " kingdom of heaven/' in this passage, can not 
refer to the future world of glory; because, first, 
those that get safely to heaven, and are, like Laza- 
rus, " children of that kingdom/' will never be 
"cast out into outer darkness/' secondly, those 
who have remained impenitent till death and the 
judgment, like the "rich man" in the Gospel, will 
not then be admitted into Abraham's bosom. Abra- 
ham assured the rich man that there was a great 
"gulf" between them, "so that they which would 
pass from hence to you can not; neither can they 
pass to us, that would come from thence." 

Hence, the term "kingdom of heaven" must re- 
fer to Christ's spiritual kingdom on earth; the 
"many that shall come from the east and west" are 
the Gentiles who shall be converted to Christ, and 
admitted into the Church to which the patriarch 
belonged, and thus "sit down with Abraham, and 
Isaac, and Jacob;" while the "children of the 
kingdom" were the Jews, born and bred members 
of the Church, but were to be "cast out" of it, 
even "into outer darkness." 

In Matthew xxi, 43, after the well-known parable 
of the "householder," and of his treatment by the 
"husbandmen," Jesus says, "Therefore I say unto 
you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, 
and given to a, nation bringing forth the fruits 
thereof." 



96 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

The " kingdom of God," in this instance, can not 
mean heaven, nor even the dispensation of the Gos- 
pel alone; but must refer to God's spiritual king- 
dom as it had existed among the Jews, to whom 
the parable was addressed and applied. They were 
to be dispossessed of this kingdom, and it given to 
the Gentiles, among whom it would hereafter find 
its subjects mostly, and subjects, too, that would 
" bring forth the fruits thereof." 

We will now glance back at the holy prophets, 
and see what kind of treatment they predicted the 
Church to which they belonged should receive from 
the coming Messiah. 

In Psalm lxxxix, 3, 4, the prophet says, "I have 
made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn 
unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish 
forever, and build up thy throne to all generations." 
No person at all acquainted with the history of 
David's literal descendants and throne, will pretend 
that these promises have ever been literally fulfilled, 
nor can they be. David's seed, since the coming 
of Christ, have fared the same fate that befell 
the other descendants of the patriarchs, and his 
throne has been cut down, never to rise again in 
time. These promises, then, must have a spirit- 
ual signification; they must refer to a spiritual seed 
which was to be established forever, and a spiritual 
throne which was to be "built up to all genera- 
tions," by Jesus Christ, the offspring of David. 

Jeremiah — xxiii, 5, 6 — says, "Behold, the days 
come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 97 

righteous branch, and a king shall reign and pros- 
per, and shall execute judgment and justice in the 
earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Is- 
rael shall dwell safely; and this is the name whereby 
he shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness" 
The seed promised to David, which should be " es- 
tablished forever," was the " righteous branch" to 
be raised unto David, who should be called the Lord 
our righteousness. This seed was Jesus Christ. But 
how was the throne of David to be " built up to all 
generations," under the administration of Jesus 
Christ? and how was Judah to "be saved," and Is- 
rael to be made to " dwell in safety" in his day ? For 
Jesus Christ had nothing to do with David's literal 
throne, nor did he protect Judah and Israel from 
the power of their enemies, the Romans. This 
whole subject, I think, will gain additional light 
from Isaiah ix, 6, 7 : " For unto us a child is born, 
unto us a son is given ; and the government shall be 
upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called 
Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The ever- 
lasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the 
increase of his government and peace there shall 
be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his 
kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judg- 
ment and with justice from henceforth even for- 
ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform 
this." 

The points here to be settled, we present to all 
anti-pedobaptists in the following questions : 

1. What "throne of David " did Christ, the 
7 



98 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Prince of Peace, while on earth, occupy and es- 
tablish ? 

2. What "kingdom" of David did Christ, the 
"Wonderful Counselor," "order and establish with 
judgment and with justice from henceforth, even 
forever?" To all who deny the spirituality and 
perpetuity of the Church organized in the family 
of Abraham, and to which David belonged, and over 
which he held a temporary government, we present 
the above questions, and demand an answer, that 
will agree with their theory, and not involve the 
utter failure of the above prophecies. There is, I 
think, but one way in which they can be consist- 
ently answered, and that way, while it maintains 
the truth of God, destroys the theory of our oppo- 
nents. 

David's jurisdiction in Israel was both temporal 
and ecclesiastical; it extended over both Church 
and state. Therefore, 

1. The " throne of David" is referred to only 
as an emblem of spiritual elevation and power, 
invested for a time in David, but which Jesus 
Christ, the "Prince of Peace," and "David's seed," 
was to inherit and establish forever. And this gov- 
ernment, which "shall be upon his shoulder/' with 
its peace, shall increase forever, and be "built up to 
all generations." 

2. The "kingdom of David," spoken of, was the 
spiritual compact over which David's dominion ex- 
tended, which was organized in the family of Abra- 
ham, and which, with the throne of David, was to 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 99 

be inherited by Jesus Christ, and by him " ordered 
and established, with judgment and with justice 
from henceforth even forever." And this explains 
how " Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell 
safely" in the " days" of " the Lord our righteous- 
ness." 

Again — Isaiah xvi, 5 — "And in mercy shall the 
throne be established : and he shall sit upon it in 
truth in the tabernacle of David, judging, and 
seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness." 
Amos ix, 11, 12 : "In that day will I raise up the 
tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the 
breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and 
I will build it as in the days of old : that they may 
possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen 
which are called by my name, saith the Lord that 
doeth this." 

Now, let us see how the apostle James explains 
and applies all these prophecies we have been quot- 
ing. Acts xv, 13-17: "And after they had held 
their peace, James answered, saying, Men and 
brethren, hearken unto me. Simeon hath declared 
how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take 
out of them a people for his name. And to this 
agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, 
after this I will return, and will build again the 
tabernacle of David which is fallen down; and I 
will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it 
up: that the residue of men might seek after the 
Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is 
called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things." 



100 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Thus St. James applies these prophecies concern- 
ing the re-establishing^ " raising up/' and enlarge- 
ment of the tabernacle of David to what was then 
taking place by the preaching of the Gospel among 
the Gentiles, by which hundreds of them were be- 
ing converted to God and added to the Church of 
Christ. 

Daniel — ii, 44 — says, "And in the days of these 
kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, 
which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom 
shall not be left to other people, but it shall break 
in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it 
shall stand forever." This kingdom, which the 
God of heaven was to "set up" in the days of the 
Eoman kings, and which was destined to destroy 
them all and stand itself forever, is the kingdom of 
David, which had become broken down by the 
apostasy and expulsion of so many of its former 
subjects, the Jews; but which the Lord was to "set 
up," and "establish it in judgment and justice," 
and of its "increase there was to be no end." Now, 
this increase had just commenced, and the king- 
dom was being "set up," elevated, and enlarged, 
when St. James arose and declared the fulfillment 
of prophecy in the conversion of the Gentiles. 

But the extent to which the kingdom was to be 
elevated and enlarged is thus described by the same 
prophet — Daniel vii, 27 — "And the kingdom and 
dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under 
the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the 
saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an ever- 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 101 

lasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and 
obey him." Again — Zech. ix, 10 — "And he shall 
speak peace unto the heathen : and his dominion 
shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river 
even to the ends of the earth." JNTow, when these 
prophecies are all fulfilled, then will "all nations 
of the earth be blessed" by Christ, the promised 
seed of Abraham; and till then the immutability 
of the covenant is our guarantee that it will be 
accomplished. 

Again: when all nations become Christ's, then 
will they all be "Abraham's seed," and "heirs ac- 
cording to the promise," a "father of many na- 
tions have I made thee." Thus, at least, can the 
promises contained in the Abrahamic covenant only 
be fulfilled, when the heathen are given to Christ, 
and the uttermost parts of the earth become his 
possession. We can now, too, comprehend the 
meaning of the apostle when he says — Romans iv, 
13 — "For the promise that he should be the heir 
of the world was not to Abraham, or to his seed 
through the law."* To constitute Abraham heir of the 
world, the world must, in some sense, be infallibly 
secured to him by promise, covenant, or oath. Now, 
in what place, and in what sense was the world thus 
secured to Abraham? In the first place God prom- 
ised that Abraham's seed should outnumber the 
"stars in the heavens," and the particles of "dust 
upon the earth." And, secondly, he covenanted 
with him that he should be a " father of a multi- 
tude of nations." And, thirdly, he swore that, 



102 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

C{ multiplying, I will multiply thee. " This promise, 
covenant, and oath, referred not to his seed through 
the law only ; but it made him the " father of all 
them that believe ;" and when the world shall believe 
in Christ, then shall Abraham be heir of the world. 
The believing world will be his inheritance. 

Dr. Clarke, when commenting on Romans iv, 13, 
says, " Abraham is represented as having all the 
world given to him as his inheritance, because in 
him all the nations of the earth are blessed. This 
must, therefore, relate to their being all interested 
in the Abrahamic covenant. And every person, 
now that the covenant is fully explained, has the 
privilege of claiming, through faith, justification 
through the blood of the Lamb, in virtue of his 
original grant." How it expands the heart of a 
Christian to know and feel that he belongs to a 
Church as old as Abraham ! — one, too, that will con- 
tinue to exist while the sun, and moon, and earth, 
and time endure, or the cycle of eternity roll ! — a 
Church, too, as wide as the world on which we live; 
embracing all true believers of every age, country, 
and clime, ay, and their infant offspring with 
them ! — a Church with that broad promise of Je- 
hovah for its support — u l will be a God unto thee, 
and thy seed after thee !" How much this doctrine 
concerning the Church resembles the doctrine of a 
general atonement! How sweetly they lie together 
in the same heart! And what a pity that good 
men will sever what God hath evidently joined 
together ! Cease to do so, my brethren. Let the 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 103 

doctrine of a limited atonement, a Church only 
organized on the day of Pentecost, containing no 
infant children, close communion, and baptism only 
by immersion, which have so strong an affinity for 
each other, live and die in each other's company. 



SECTION VIII. 

THE UNITY OF THE CHUECH OF CHEIST UNDER THE JEWISH AND 
CHRISTDAN" DISPENSATIONS. 

It may be proper, at the outset, to explain what 
we mean by ecclesiastical identity or unity. We do 
not mean by it a perfect similarity or sameness in 
the legislation, or ordinances, or forms of religious 
worship; or that the same officers govern, or the 
same persons belong to the Church now that did 
under the former dispensation; or that the Church 
is confined to the same country now as formerly. 
In all these respects changes have occurred; and 
many of them were anticipated and provided for 
long before they occurred. If I were to assert that 
the United States of America was the identical 
nation that it was fifty years ago, I would not be 
understood to say, that no changes had occurred in 
the officers of the government, in the legislation, 
people, or face of the country. But it would be 
necessary to prove, and it could easily be done, 

1. That the same Constitution which governed us 



104 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

as a nation fifty years since, governs us now; and 
that the changes which have taken place in relation 
to officers, people, laws, and the country generally, 
occurred without any violent change in the Consti- 
tution; or if even a change has been made in some 
of the articles of the Constitution, they have been 
made by the constituted authorities. 

2. That the same political compact that was 
organized under the Constitution continues to exist, 
and to act under it; and that whatever additions 
have been made to this compact, have been made 
by the constituted authorities, and without violence 
to the Constitution. 

Well, we have proven in preceding sections, 

1. That the covenant made with Abraham, so far, 
at least, as it refers to the spiritual precept enjoined 
upon Abraham and his seed, and the promise of 
a numerous spiritual seed, embracing all believers 
in Christ and their infant offspring, whether Jews 
or Gentiles, was literally and grammatically an ever- 
lasting covenant, which has never been repealed 
or altered; that although some of the blessings 
promised to Abraham's natural seed had failed to 
be realized by them, it was because these were 
promised conditionally, and they had failed to live 
up to the conditions; hence, the failure in these 
particulars did not destroy the everlasting character 
of the covenant. 

2. Christ, who formed that covenant with Abra- 
ham, and who promised him that numerous spirit- 
ual seed, notwithstanding all the changes that have 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 105 

taken place in relation to the faltering natural seed 
of Abraham — the changes made in the laws, ordi- 
nances, and modes of worship enjoined upon this 
spiritual seed promised — has preserved, perpetua- 
ted, blessed, and increased it down through both 
dispensations, and is to bless, govern, and increase 
it till Abraham, according to promise, is made "heir 
of the world." 

We will now proceed to examine more closely 
than we have done, the additions made to the 
Church of Christ in the New Testament, by the 
labors of the apostles, and show the identity of 
these Churches, formed in different sections of the 
country, with the old Abrahamic stock, or " Church 
in the wilderness." 

1. We will commence with the day of Pentecost; 
especially as that is the time when, anti-pedobap- 
tists say, the Church of Christ was formed. But 
will they please to show us a Christian covenant intro- 
duced on that day, or previous to it, by Jesus Christ, 
on which the Church was founded, and in which 
the character and privileges of its members are de- 
fined? No, they can not do it; for none was made ! 
Acts i, 15, we read, "And in those days Peter 
stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, 
(the number of the names together were about a 
hundred and twenty.") Now, this "hundred and 
twenty," I suppose, constituted the number of gen- 
uine believers in Christ which remained together 
after the Savior had "thoroughly purged his floor." 
They therefore constituted the seed of Abraham, 



106 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

and the Church of Christ. Hence, it was in this 
Church that Matthias was ordained a minister; and 
upon it the Holy Ghost was poured out, which 
caused the unbelieving Jews to "mock/' etc. Now, 
after Peter preached that remarkable sermon which 
produced conviction in so many hearts, he said — 
Acts ii, 88, 39 — "Repent, and be baptized every one 
of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remis- 
sion of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the 
Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to 
your children, and to all that are afar off, even as 
many as the Lord our God shall call." "We will 
here pause and inquire, What promise does the 
apostle Peter refer to ? A pedobaptist would say he 
refers to Gen. xvii, 7: "I will be a God unto thee, 
and to thy seed after thee." If this be true, then 
Peter evidently reaffirms the Abrahamic covenant 
as the foundation on which the Church of Christ 
was still to rest, and as furnishing the very promises 
through which repenting sinners might look for 
divine mercy, as well as a visible admission to 
Church fellowship and privileges, in connection 
with their infant offspring. But an anti-pedobaptist 
would say that* Peter referred to Joel ii, 28, 29 : 
"And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will 
pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons 
and your daughters shall prophesy," etc. 

The only reason why they suppose he referred to 
Joel, is because Peter quotes the above passage in 
the 17th verse. Well, we will not wait for the con- 
troversy to be settled between the above parties, for 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 107 

the position of the o.nti-pedo is sufficient for our 
present purpose. To whom, then, did the prophet 
Joel originally address this language ? In the first 
verse he says, "Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and 
sound an alarm in my holy mountain." And then, 
after describing the most dreadful calamities which 
should befall the people of Zion, he describes a 
day of great joy and prosperity to this same people : 
he says — 23d verse — "Be glad, then, ye children 
of Zion, and rejoice in the Lord your God;" and 
in the 27th verse, "And ye shall know that I am 
in the midst of Israel; and that I am the Lord your 
God, and none else; and my people shall never be 
ashamed." And then comes the promise, "And it 
shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my 
Spirit upon all flesh ; and your sons and your daugh- 
ters shall prophesy," etc. Now, this prophet was 
himself a member of the Old Testament Church, 
denominated "Israel," or "Zion." And his whole 
prophecy relates to her adversity, and prosperity 
in future days. It was to her, then, that the Lord 
promised to "pour his Spirit" upon all flesh; and 
her "sons and daughters" were to "prophesy." 
Now, it was very proper for Peter to apply the above 
promise to the hundred and twenty on whom the 
Holy Ghost fell on the "day of Pentecost;" for 
some of these did "speak with tongues," and 
prophesy; and they at the time constituted the 
Zion, or Israel of the prophet. And the declaration 
on the part of Peter, that this same promise was 
applicable to those repenting Jews, and to their 



108 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

children, and them that were "afar off, even as 
many as the Lord onr God shall call/' only proves 
the perpetuity of the Old Testament Zion, with its 
promises, throughout the new dispensation. Acts 
ii, 41, it is said, "Then they that gladly received 
his word were baptized: and the same day there 
was added unto them about three thousand souls." 
Added unto them ! Added unto whom ? Why, evi- 
dently unto the "hundred and twenty" believers 
on whom the "Holy Ghost" was "poured," and 
who constituted the Zion to whom it was promised; 
this was the Church to which the three thousand 
were added on the day of Pentecost. 

In the 47th verse it is said, "And the Lord added 
to the Church daily such as should be saved;" thus, 
evidently, recognizing the Church already in exist- 
ence as the true one, to which all their young con- 
verts were added. And thus, on the very day when 
our opponents say the new covenant and Christian 
Church was formed, instead thereof, we find St. 
Peter referring either to the Abrahamic covenant 
direct, or to a prophecy delivered by the prophet 
Joel, to the Zion which was organized under it, 
promising her perpetuity and spiritual prosperity 
under the new dispensation, as the foundation of 
hope, and the source from whence to expect the 
forgiveness of sins, the comforts of the Holy Ghost, 
as well as a reinstatement in the Church of Christ 
by baptism, both on the part of penitent adults, 
their children, and of millions yet unborn, that the 
Lord in mercy would call by his Gospel. 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 109 

But whether St. Peter refers to the promise con- 
tained in the Abrahamic covenant, or not, in the 
above instance, he certainly does immediately after, 
in Acts iii, 25 : " Ye are the children of the prophets, 
and of the covenant which God made with our 
fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed 
shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." 
Thus he refers to their relation to the Abrahamic 
covenant as children, in which covenant they had 
a promise of Christ, as still securing to them the 
blessings of the Gospel of Christ; for he immedi- 
ately adds — 26th verse — "Unto you first God, hav- 
ing raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in 
turning away every one of you from his iniquities." 
Now, why this appeal to the Abrahamic covenant, 
if that covenant was no longer in force, and its 
blessings unavailable ? This very appeal, though it 
relates to but one of its promises and the numerous 
blessings which it secured, clearly proves the entire 
instrument yet in force, and all of its spiritual bless- 
ings yet to be enjoyed. 

And the apostle making this appeal to the Abra- 
hamic covenant, so soon after referring to the prom- 
ise which was unto them and their children, etc., 
together with the fact that his language agrees so 
much better with the language of the promise in 
Gen. xvii, 7, than of Joel ii, 28, renders it much 
more probable, in my estimation, that St. Peter 
referred directly to the Abrahamic covenant, when 
he said, "The promise is unto you, and to your chil- 
dren, and to all that are afar off, even as many as 



110 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

tlie Lord our God shall call;" thus, in two instances, 
confirming the Abrahamic covenant as the charter 
of the Church of Christ throughout the new dis- 
pensation; at the very time ; too, when we are told 
a new covenant was rnade ; and a new church or- 
ganized. 

2. We will examine St. Paul's Epistle to the 
Komans. 

Br. Clarke, in his Introduction, says, "The 
occasion of writing this epistle may be easily 
collected from the epistle itself. It appears that 
the Church in this city consisted partly of heathens 
converted to Christianity, and partly of Jews, who 
had, with many remaining prejudices, believed in 
Jesus as the true Messiah, and that many conten- 
tions arose from the claims of the Gentile converts 
to equal privileges with the Jews, and from the 
absolute refusal of the Jews to admit these claims 
unless the Gentile converts became circumcised : he 
wrote to adjust this difficulty." 

Br. Paley says that the object of the apostle was 
to "place the Gentile convert upon a parity of- situ- 
ation with the Jewish, with respect to his religious 
condition, and his rank in the Divine favor." Al- 
though the above object can be seen throughout the 
epistle, the apostle brings his arguments to a more 
direct bearing upon it in the fourth, ninth, and 
eleventh chapters. Having already quoted exten- 
sively from the fourth chapter, we will pass to chap- 
ter ix, 3-6 : " For I could wish that myself were 
accursed from Christ, [expelled from his Church,] 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. Ill 

for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh : 
who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adop- 
tion, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giv- 
ing of the law, and the service of God, and the 
promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom, as 
concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, 
God blessed forever. Not as though the word of 
God had taken none effect. For they are not all 
Israel, which are of Israel." The apostle's mean- 
ing is still plainer in the seventh and eighth verses : 
"Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are 
they all children : but, in Isaac shall thy seed be 
called. That is, They which are the children of 
the flesh, these are not the children of God ; but 
the children of the promise are counted for the 
seed." 

Now, the apostle is laboring here to show this 
simple fact, that many of Abraham's natural chil- 
dren, on account of their impiety, were not counted 
among the seed pronounced to Abraham in the cov- 
enant. Many were of Israel that were not true Is- 
raelites. Many were the seed of Abraham natu- 
rally that were not his children spiritually. This 
was especially true when the apostle wrote, because 
the Savior's "ax" had been "laid at the root of the 
trees, and every tree that did not bring forth good 
fruit was hewn down," etc., leaving only such as 
were true Israelites connected with Israel. But, to 
show that God had not cast out of his Church all 
of the descendants of Israel, he says — Rom. xi, 1, 
2 — "I say then, hath God cast away his people? 



112 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

God forbid. For I am an Israelite, of the seed of 
Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not 
cast away his people whom he foreknew." And he 
might have joined with himself the " hundred and 
twenty" on whom the Holy Ghost was poured, and 
the thousands that were added to their number on 
the day of Pentecost, and afterward, who were the 
literal descendants of the patriarch, to whom prob- 
ably he had reference in the fifth verse: "Even 
so then at this present time also there is a remnant 
according to the election of grace." In the fifteenth, 
sixteenth, and seventeenth verses, he says, " For if 
the casting away of them be the reconciling of the 
world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life 
from the dead ? For if the first fruit be holy, the 
lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are 
the branches. And if some of the branches be 
broken off, and thou being a wild olive-tree, wert 
graffed in among them, and with them partakest of 
the root and fatness of the olive-tree." 

The apostle evidently borrows the figure of the 
" olive-tree" from Jeremiah xi, 16: "The Lord 
called thy name, a green olive-tree, fair, and of 
goodly fruit." And both Jeremiah and St. Paul 
evidently design to represent by it the Church of 
God as it existed among the descendants of Israel. 
" For if the first fruit," that is, Abraham and his 
early descendants, Isaac and Jacob, "be holy," 
that is, were wholly consecrated to God, " the lump," 
the ecclesiastical compact to which they belonged, 
"is also holy;" that is, it was the Lord's by conse- 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 113 

oration; for in this sense the word holy is generally 
used by Jewish writers. " And if the root be 
holy/' that is, the covenant engagements on which 
the Church rested and grew, "so are the branches/' 
those that legitimately grew up according to the 
covenant engagements into which they entered in 
their infancy. "And if some of the branches be 
broken off/' that is, some of the Jewish members 
expelled, "and thou, being a wild olive-tree/'' evi- 
dently referring to Gentile converts, "wert grafted 
in among them, and with them partakest of the 
root and fatness of the olive tree;" that is, brought 
into the same relation to the covenant and Church 
that the pious Jew sustains, enjoying with them all 
the great spiritual blessings promised and made sure 
to them in their covenant. "And if* the casting 
away of them be the reconciling of the world," 
that is, the casting away of the unbelieving Jews, 
was the occasion of the riches of God's grace and 
goodness being communicated to the Gentile world, 
"what shall the receiving of them be, but life from 
the dead?" thai is, the restoration of the Jews to 
the favor of God and the privileges of the Church, 
will be regarded by the Church as the restoration 
of an intimate friend to life, who had been regarded 
as dead. In the eighteenth to the twenty-first 
verses, the apostle says to these new Gentile mem- 
bers, "Boast not against the branches. But if thou 
boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 
Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, 
that I might be graffed in. Well; because of un- 



114 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

belief they were broken off, and thou standest by 
faith. Be not high-Blinded, but fear: for if God 
spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he 
also spare not thee." The apostle keeps up the 
figure. The Israelitish Church, founded upon the 
Abrahamic covenant, is the olive-tree with its root; 
the unbelieving Jews, who were the " natural 
branches," were "broken off;" and these converted 
Gentiles were grafted into the same olive-tree from 
which the Jews were " broken off;" and they are 
exhorted not to be " high-minded," but to "fear," 
"lest he also spare not thee." In verses twenty- 
two to twenty-four, he says, "Behold therefore the 
goodness and severity of God : on them which fell, 
severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou con- 
tinue in his goodness : otherwise thou also shalt be 
cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in 
unbelief, shall be graffed in : for God is able to graff 
them in again. For if thou wert cut out of the 
olive-tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed 
contrary to nature into a good olive-tree ; how much 
more shall these, which be the natural branches, 
be graffed into their own olive-tree?" This olive- 
tree, representing the Church from which those un- 
believing Jews were broken off, is called a "good 
olive-tree" and " their own olive-tree" and "God is 
able to graff them in again." But, pray, how can he 
"graff them in again" if he has destroyed that 
tree, root and branch? 

In verses twenty-five to twenty-seven, he says, 
"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 115 

ignorant of this mystery, (lest ye should be wise in 
your own conceits,) that blindness in part is hap- 
pened to Israel, till the fullness of the Gentiles be 
come in. And so all Israel shall be saved : as it is 
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, 
and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob : for 
this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take 
away their sins." Thus it appears that the word of 
God is pledged for the readmission of the Jews into 
the same olive-tree — Church — from which their 
fathers were excluded. But how is this readmis- 
sion to take place ? by circumcision ? Certainly 
not. St. Peter readmitted the Jews into the Church 
of Christ, on the day of Pentecost, by baptizing 
them — see Acts ii, 28, 41 : hence, we conclude that 
baptism will constitute the mode of visibly acknowl- 
edging the membership of repenting Jews, when 
u all Israel shall be saved," and grafted into their 
good old olive-tree. Now, suppose that a repenting 
Jew should approach an anti-jpedobaptist elder, and, 
pointing him to the eleventh chapter of Romans, 
should request him to graft him into the good old 
olive-tree of the patriarchs, how would the elder 
manage to accomplish his request without violence 
to his own Christian faith on that subject? I fear 
that without a radical change in their views upon 
this subject, anti-pedobaptists will never be the hon- 
ored instruments of grafting the returning Jews 
into " their own olive-tree." 

3. "We will examine St. Paul's Epistle to the Ga- 
latians, and see with what Church they were identi- 



116 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

fied. At an early day Paul visited Galatia, and first 
planted the Gospel among the people in that prov- 
ince. Afterward, a certain Judaizing teacher came 
among them, inculcating the necessity of circum- 
cision and obedience to the ceremonial law of Mo- 
ses, as the ground of their Church relations, rights, 
and privileges, as well as their hopes of pardon and 
salvation. St. Paul labors to show, especially in 
the third chapter, that all Church rights and bless- 
ings are secured to believers in Christ, both Jews 
and Gentiles, not by the law of Moses, but by the 
Abrahamic covenant; hence, the drift of the apos- 
tle's argument goes to show that if justification 
came "by the law, then Christ is dead in vain/ 7 
and " that they which are of faith," instead of those 
that kept the law, were the true " children of Abra- 
ham." The apostle says — Gal. iii, 6-8 — "Even as 
Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to 
him for righteousness. Know ye therefore, that 
they which are of faith, the same are the children 
of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that 
God would justify the heathen through faith, 
preached before the Gospel unto Abraham, saying, 
In thee shall all nations be blessed." The idea of 
believing Gentiles being justified and numbered 
among the seed of Abraham, was by no means a 
new doctrine, then for the first time introduced. It 
was foreseen and provided for when the promise was 
made to Abraham that in his seed all nations should 
be blessed. " So then they which be of faith are 
blessed with faithful Abraham." Gal. iii, 9. Then 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 117 

comes the question whether the observance of the 
law was not also requisite after the coming of Christ, 
both to secure their justification and recognition as 
the seed of Abraham. This question the apostle 
answers as follows — verses 10-14 — " For as many as 
are of the works of the law, are under the curse ; 
for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth 
not in all things which are written in the book of 
the law to do them. But that no man is justified 
by the law in the sight of God, it is evident 5 for 
the just shall live by faith. And the law is not of 
faith; but the man that doth them shall live in 
them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of 
the law, being made a curse for us; for it is writ- 
ten, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 
that the blessings of Abraham might come on the 
Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might re- 
ceive the promise of the Spirit through faith." 

The law, at best, could only justify those who 
obeyed it, as it contained no provision for a pardon. 
And no person could obey it in every particular with- 
out grace through Christ ; and grace could only be 
obtained through faith. Hence, faith in Christ, 
who was promised and made infallibly sure in the 
Abrahamic covenant, was the only medium of jus- 
tification to the descendants of Abraham while un- 
der the law. But now, Christ having come agree- 
ably to promise, and having borne the curse which 
the law pronounced upon all delinquents, they were 
no longer under either the law or its curse, but, like 
Abraham, who lived before the law was given, were 



118 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

justified by simple faith in Christ. And this same 
blessing, enjoyed by Abraham before the law was 
given, and now by his descendants., had also " come 
on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ;" who also 
now were justified as Abraham was, by simple faith, 
without the deeds of the law. And now that the 
law was abolished, and its curse endured by Jesus 
Christ, and justification proffered to both Jews and 
Gentiles upon the simple condition of faith, the 
apostle proceeds to show the permanent and immu- 
table character of the covenant in which all this was 
originally made sure. He says — verses 15-17 — 
" Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; 
though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be con- 
firmed, no man disannulleth or addeth thereto. 
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises 
made. He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; 
but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ. 
And this 1 say, that the covenant that was con- 
firmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was 
four hundred and thirty years after, can not disan- 
nul, that it should make the promise of none effect." 
Of the covenant he says, " Though it be but a 
man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man dis- 
annulleth or addeth thereto." How much more a 
covenant made and " confirmed by God in Christ!" 
Now, the abolition of the law, which was different 
in character, and so much more recent in its origin, 
"can not disannul" the covenant, so as to "make 
the promise of none effect." The apostle continues 
to the end of the chapter, in the same powerful and 



THE ABRAHAMIC COYENANT. 119 

conclusive process of reasoning, to show the tempo- 
rary character of the law and the permanent and im- 
mutable character of the Abrahamic covenant. And 
having completely and triumphantly defended the 
covenant, he winds up the chapter by saying, " And 
if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and 
heirs according to the promise." Thus is the per- 
petuity of the covenant, and of the Church as 
organized upon it, through both dispensations, 
clearly maintained by St. Paul, in his Epistle to 
the Galatians; leaving the Judaizing teacher and 
the anti-pedobaptist elder both refuted by the same 
argument. 

4. We will next examine St. Paul's Epistle to 
the Ephesians, and see if they, too, were not iden- 
tified with the Church organized among the patri- 
archs. St. Paul also founded the Church at Ephe- 
sus, and the same difficulty seems to have existed 
there, that troubled other places where the converts 
were partly Jews and partly Gentiles. Dr. Clarke 
says, "The Jews considered themselves an elect or 
chosen people, and wished to monopolize the whole 
of the Divine love and beneficence. The apostle 
here shows that God had the Gentiles as much in 
the contemplation of his mercy and goodness as he 
had the Jews; and the blessings of the Gospel, now 
so freely dispensed to them, were the proof that 
God had thus chosen them, and that his end in giv- 
ing them the Gospel was the same which he had in 
view by giving the law to the Jews; namely, that 
they might be holy and without blame before him." 



120 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Passing over the first chapter, in which this subject 
is laboriously discussed, and his reasoning some- 
what intricate, we pause at chapter ii, where his 
reasoning is brought more to a point. The apostle 
says — verses 11, 12 — " Wherefore remember, that 
ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh; . . . that 
at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens 
from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers 
from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and 
without God in the world/' The paraphrase of Dr. 
Macknight on the above verses is as follows : 

"11. Wherefore, to strengthen your sense of 
God's goodness in saving you, and of the obligation 
he hath thereby laid on you to do good works, ye 
Ephesians should remember that ye were formerly 
Gentiles by natural descent, who are called uncircum- 
cised and unholy, by that nation which is called cir- 
cumcised with a circumcision made with men's hands 
in the flesh, and which esteems itself holy on that 
account, and entitled to the promises. 

"12. And that ye were at that time without the 
knowledge of Christ, being by your idolatry alienated 
from the Jewish nation, which alone had the knowl- 
edge of his coming, and of the blessings he was to 
bestow, and unacquainted with the covenants, namely, 
that made with Abraham, and that made with the 
Israelites at Sinai, which promised and prefigured 
Christ's coming to bestow these blessings; so that ye 
had no sure hope of the pardon of sin, nor of a 
blessed immortality; and were without the knowl- 
edge and worship of God, while in the heathen 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 121 

world." The apostle continues to say to these con- 
verted Gentiles — verses 13, 14, 15 — "But now, in 
Christ Jesus, ye, who sometimes were far off, are 
made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our 
peace, who hath made both one and hath broken 
down the middle wall of partition between us ; hav- 
ing abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law 
of commandments contained in ordinances; for 
to make in himself of twain one new man, so mak- 
ing peace." The ceremonial law of Moses, which 
was the "middle wall of partition" between Jews 
and Gentiles, being "abolished" by Christ, believ- 
ing Jews and Gentiles are united now in one 
Church. And this is in perfect accordance with 
what Christ said he was going to do — St. John x, 
16 — "And other sheep I have, [Gentiles,] which 
are not of this fold, [Jews :] them, also, I must 
bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there 
shall be one fold, and one shepherd." The apostle 
adds — 16th, 17th verses — "And that he might 
reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, 
having slain the enmity thereby: and came and 
preached peace to you which were afar off, and to 
them that were nigh." The same sentiment is con- 
tinued in the 18th and 19th verses, "For through 
him we both have access by one Spirit unto the 
Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers 
and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, 
and of the household of God." And again, in 
verses 20-22: "And are built [both Jews and 
Gentiles] upon the foundation of the apostles and 



122 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cor- 
ner-stone; in whom all the building [Jews and 
Gentiles] fitly framed together, groweth unto a holy 
temple in the Lord : in whom ye also are builded 
together for a habitation of God through the Spirit/' 
Thus we find in St. Paul's letter to the Ephesians 
evident allusion to the permanent character of the 
promises made in the Abrahamic covenant; the 
temporary character of the law of Moses; and the 
identity of the Christian Church with the Jewish : 
in other words, the perpetuity of the Church with 
its covenant as organized in the family of Abraham. 
We might quote passages from Colossians and He- 
brews, substantiating the same doctrines ; but were 
we to embrace all that could be brought forward 
upon this point, the reader's patience would prob- 
ably be exhausted: we therefore close this section. 



SECTION IX. 

INCONSISTENCIES OF THOSE WHO DENY THE IDENTITY OF THE CHURCH 
UNDER THE CHRISTIAN AND JEWISH DISPENSATIONS. 

This, we know, is a delicate point, in our general 
argument, and likely to give offense. But we can 
not do justice to our subject without it; and our 
object is not to offend, but to convince. 

I. They virtually declare that the venerable patri- 
archs, such as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph; 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 123 

and all the pious kings, such as David, Solomon, 
and Hezekiah; with all the holy prophets, such as 
Moses, Isaiah, Daniel, and John the Baptist, both 
lived and died without any visible connection with 
the Church of Christ; that all the ministering 
priests, from Aaron to Zachariah, and all the saints 
of the Old Testament, now in heaven, lived and 
died in no other than a heathen state — interested 
only in a graceless covenant, which proffered only 
temporal blessings ! Now, here is a dilemma with 
two horns: the reader can take which he pleases; 
but one he must take. Either the long list of Old 
Testament saints, above referred to, were Christians, 
belonging to the visible Church of Christ, founded 
upon a spiritual and gracious covenant, or they 
were not. If the former be the fact, our doctrine 
is true; but if the latter be the true doctrine, then 
the Old Testament saints were all in a heathen 
state, and if saved at all, were saved as pious 
heathens are — through the uncovenanted mercy of 
God! Who, let me ask, is prepared for the last 
horn of this dilemma? No person, I trust, but 
such as are taught to exclude all persons from the 
Christian Church and communion, who have not 
been baptized in a peculiar form. 

Pedobaptists should not complain at being un- 
churched along with such company. So long as we 
are classed along with the pious patriarchs, prophets, 
priests, kings, and other saints of the Old Testa- 
ment, we should be perfectly satisfied with our posi- 
tion. We should be willing to serve God, and go 



124 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

to heaven with such persons; even if we must, as a 
consequence, lose the opportunity of communing 
occasionally with our opponents by the way. 

II. Our opponents generally refer to the baptism 
of John ; to prove that immersion is the only door 
into the Church of Christ; while, in opposing in- 
fant Church membership, they say the Church of 
Christ had no existence till the day of Pentecost! 
Here, then, is a most singular phenomenon — a door 
erected years before the Church, to which it be- 
longed, existed! Thousands were led by John 
through the visible door, but, to their utter disap- 
pointment, found no Church there till several years 
had elapsed! and many, who entered by the true 
door, never lived to see the Church erected, or to 
enjoy a connection with it; and therefore lived and 
died as Abraham and Moses did, in a heathen state, 
even after they had entered the true and only door 
into the Church of Christ ! 

Here, again, is a dilemma, with three horns, on 
one or other of which our opponents must hang. 
They must admit, 

1. That the Church of Christ existed before the 
baptism of John, which is the same as to admit that 
it existed in the family of Abraham, and that John 
belonged to it. Or, 

2. That John's baptism was not the true door 
into the Church of Christ, and was not Christian 
baptism. Or, 

8. That John instituted the true door into the 
Church of Christ, before the Church existed; and 



THE ABRAIJAMIC COVENANT. 125 

inducted thousands through that door, who, not- 
withstanding, never belonged to the Church, but 
died in a heathen state, after receiving regular 
Christian baptism ! 

The first, in our opinion, is the true position. 

III. Close-communion Baptists say that the reason 
why they will not commune with pedobaptists is, 
because they have not been properly inducted into 
the Church of Christ; consequently, to administer 
the sacrament to pedobaptists would be carrying the 
ordinance out of the Church, to accommodate per- 
sons who refuse to enter it in due form. But if 
the Church of Christ had no existence till the day 
of Pentecost, then Christ was never himself properly 
a member of the Church of Christ \ for he was not 
only crucified, but ascended to heaven before the 
day of Pentecost. He must also have instituted 
the sacrament out of the Church of Christ; and the 
apostles, to whom it was first administered, were at 
the time not members of the Church; for this all 
occurred before the day of Pentecost. Hence, our 
opponents must either admit that the Church of 
Christ existed before the day of Pentecost, and be- 
fore the Lord's supper was instituted, or else say that 
Jesus Christ, his apostles, and the holy sacrament 
were all of them out of the pales of the Christian 
Church. They may take which horn of this dilemma 
they please; but one of them they must take. The 
first avoids all difficulty, while the last involves us 
in most serious inconsistencies. Error not only 
contradicts truth, but is inconsistent with itself. 



126 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

IV. Baptism, as instituted in Matt, xxviii, 19, 
dates some time previous to the day of Pentecost. 
And whatever may have been the character and 
design of the baptism of John, all agree that Jesus, 
in the above instance, instituted the true Christian 
baptism ; and that baptism, as he instituted it, was 
the regular visible door into the visible Church of 
Christ. But here the same difficulties cluster which 
we found connected with the baptism of John. 
Here is a Church ordinance without a Church — a 
door opened into the Church before the Church ex- 
isted! Now, either the Church of Christ existed 
at the time Jesus instituted Christian baptism, or 
Christian baptism is not an ordinance of the Chris- 
tian Church. The reader is left to choose his own 
position. 

V. The apostles, if ever ordained by Jesus Christ 
to the Christian ministry, received that ordination 
before the day of Pentecost. Matthias was elected 
and ordained but one day before. Yet the Church 
did not then exist. Here were Christian min- 
isters elected and ordained, and no Church in ex- 
istence over which their pastoral charge extended. 
In this connection let me ask the following ques- 
tions : 

1. Is it essential that a man should belong to the 
Christian Church in order to be eligible to the 
Christian ministry? If the doctrine we oppose be 
correct, it is not; for the apostles were none of them 
members of the Church of Christ when ordained to 
the Christian ministry. How would it answer for 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. * 127 

Christian Churches now to elect and ordain men 
to the ministry who held no connection with 
them? Let our opponents set us an example of 
this kind. 

2. Is the election and ordination of Christian 
ministers entirely independent of the voice of the 
Christian Church, or are they not, to some extent, 
subject to the authority invested in the Church? 
You may answer, not while Christ, the head of the 
Church, was present himself to officiate. But was 
he present any more when Matthias was elected and 
ordained than he is at the present time ? By the 
authority, then, of what Church was he elected and 
ordained a minister? You may answer, by the au- 
thority of the apostles. Truly; but these apostles 
were not yet members of the Church of Christ by 
your own showing; for that Church did not yet 
exist. The position of our opponents, therefore, 
excludes the Church of Christ from all authority in 
the election and ordination of the ministry, their 
practice to the contrary notwithstanding. Thus 
error contradicts itself. 

VI. Finally, our opponents are compelled to give 
a different signification to the same words when 
found in the Old Testament, or even in the New, 
relating to the Church in the Old Testament, from 
what they do when applied to the Church after the 
day of Pentecost. We will here give a few in- 
stances : 

1. The terms church, congregation, or assembly, 
when applied to the people of God, before the day 



128 Infant church membership. 

of Pentecost, signify only some kind of a civil or 
judicial compact. "The Jewish institution/' says 
Mr. Campbell, "was established upon temporal and 
earthly promises, contained in the first promise 
made to Abraham. " Wholly a temporal affair ; but 
when applied to the Church after the clay of Pente- 
cost, it signifies "a religious assembly, selected and 
called out of the world by the doctrine of the Gos- 
pel, to worship the true God in Christ, according to 
his word." 

2. The Church, under both dispensations, was 
called by the Lord, "his bride." See Isaiah lx, 5; 
Jeremiah xxxii, 2; Revelation xix, 7. In the 
former instance Jehovah was wedded to a temporal 
corporation, and in the latter to a spiritual compact ; 
yet both described by the same name, and made 
to bear the same relation to God. 

3. The Church, in both stages of her history, is 
called Christ's "own house." See Hebrews iii, 1-6. 
In the first dispensation we must understand by this 
term a mere temporal fabric; while in the last, a 
spiritual edifice; both, however, described by the 
same term, and both sustaining the same relation to 
Christ as "his own house." 

4. The Lord calls the members of his Church, in 
both dispensations, "his people," "his chosen peo- 
ple." In the first they were only "his people" in 
a temporal sense; while in the last they were "his 
people" in a spiritual sense. Now, in order that 
these inconsistencies may be carried out to their 
fullest extent, I would suggest that some one com- 



THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 129 

petent to the task publish two Bible dictionaries; 
one for the old and the other for the new dispensa- 
tion; showing that the same terms used by Divine 
inspiration have one signification when applied to 
the Church before the day of Pentecost, and an- 
other and very different signification when applied 
to the Church after that period. Why is it that 
Christians will subject themselves to such glaring 
inconsistencies ? Is it for the singular gratification 
of depriving their own infant offspring of the privi- 
lege of a visible connection with the Church of 
God, and of enjoying the blessings secured to them 
in God's gracious covenant? Singular gratification, 
indeed ! And yet we can trace their opposition to 
the Abrahamic covenant, and to the " Church in 
the wilderness/' to no other cause than a fixed and 
determined opposition to infant Church membership, 
acknowledged by Christian baptism. 

How much good it does a Christian's heart to cut 
loose from all such fetters, and plant himself upon 
the broad and towering rock of promise as revealed 
in the Abrahamic covenant — "I will be a God unto 
thee, and unto thy seed after thee, in their genera- 
tions, for an everlasting covenant" — and from thence 
look abroad upon the different tribes of God's celes- 
tial host, scattered over land and sea, dwelling 
peacefully each in their own tent, or acting effi- 
ciently under their own banner, and each rejoicing 
in the prosperity of the other! — the eye running 
back to Abraham, under God, as the father and 
head of this numerous sacramental host, and then 
9 



130 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

pushing the vision of faith forward by the aid of 
prophecy, and see, in each successive age, their 
number increasing, their glory brightening, till, 
crossing the Jordan of death, they reach the blessed 
Canaan above ! 



f mi Suflnfr* 



CIRCUMCISION WAS A RELIGIOUS ORDINANCE IN THE CHURCH 
OF GOD, AND, BY THE AUTHORITY OF JESUS CHRIST, WAS 
CHANGED IN FORM TO CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. 



SECTION I. 

am. Campbell's views of circumcision corrected, and it proven 

TO BE THE RITE OF INITIATION INTO THE CHURCH OF GOD. 

The unity of the different parts of the Abra- 
hamic covenant, embracing circumcision, has already 
been considered, and, we trust, established. The 
evangelical character of the covenant has been, we 
think, fully proven. Circumcision being a token 
of that evangelical covenant, must of necessity par- 
take of its nature; and if no further proof could 
be adduced, this fact is sufficient to establish for- 
ever the evangelical character of circumcision. 

But as the spiritual character of circumcision is 
an important point, and meets with the most de- 
termined opposition from all classes of anti-peclo- 
baptists, we deem it important to examine this sub- 
ject at length, and with all the care its importance 
demands. If circumcision was instituted, as our 
opponents say, for temporal, civil, or political pur- 
poses, they are in duty bound to show what inter- 
ests of the above character it was designed to 

131 



132 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

subserve in Israel. The "burden of proof, the reader 
will observe, falls here upon our opponents, and not 
upon us. And we are not disposed to receive, on a 
point of so much importance, any but positive proof. 

We can not, without impiety, suppose that the 
God of the patriarchs would, in a covenant in which 
he had promised so many, and such rich and lasting 
blessings, at the same time impose upon the nu- 
merous descendants of these patriarchs an institu- 
tion the most burdensome, painful, and inconvenient, 
without subserving some great and general interest, 
by its observance, in Israel. 

I. We will now attend to the best statement of 
facts and array of arguments that can be brought 
by the opposition. 

Mr. Campbell, who is a leader on this subject, says, 
" This next covenant growing out of the first prom- 
ise, [keeping up his idea of two or more cove- 
nants,] is made especially for the sake of ascer- 
taining, by a fleshly mark, the natural offspring of 
Abraham, and guaranteeing to them the particular 
blessing .conveyed to Abraham by the covenant con- 
cerning the inheritance, and also as to the time of 
its institution, one year before the birth of Isaac; 
it occasioned a remarkable difference between Ish- 
mael and Isaac, though sons of the same parent — 
the former being the son of his uncircumcision, the 
latter of his circumcision, though both circumcised 
themselves, Ishmael in his thirteenth year, and 
Isaac on the eighth day." (Debate between Camp- 
bell and Eice, p. 291.) 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 133 

Again lie says, "God is determined to identify 
and preserve this flesh, commanding fathers to 
brand their sons before they knew any thing about 
it, while they were yet as passive as a stone, that 
the world might recognize it, and know that God 
keepeth covenant and mercy forever, and that his 
word standeth fast for a thousand generations." 
(Debate between Campbell and Rice, p. 308.) 

1. Mr. Campbell says circumcision was instituted 
" especially for the sake of ascertaining, by a fleshly 
mark, the natural offspring of Abraham;" but, un- 
fortunately for this assumption, as has already been 
proven, others beside the natural offspring of Abra- 
ham were circumcised. The son of the u stranger," 
as well as the natural offspring of Abraham, was to 
be circumcised. "And when a stranger shall so- 
journ with thee, and will keep the passover to the 
Lord, let all his males be circumcised. . . . One 
law shall be to him that is home-born, and to the 
stranger that sojourneth among you." Exodus xii, 
48, 49. And the history of the Jews abundantly 
shows that thousands of Gentiles were converted to 
the Jewish faith, and were identified with the nat- 
ural seed of Abraham, each bearing the same 
" fleshly mark." How, then, could circumcision 
aid in " ascertaining the natural offspring of Abra- 
ham?" 

2. He says that circumcision was "the guaran- 
teeing to them the parental blessing conveyed to 
Abraham by the covenant concerning the inherit- 
ance," meaning, I suppose, the land of Canaan. 



134 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

And yet, although they all were circumcised, not 
one of the natural descendants of the patriarchs 
possessed a foot of land in Canaan, but what they 
paid for, for the space of near five hundred years; 
and, although no complaint was ever made of their 
not being circumcised, yet, about seven hundred 
years after their settlement in Canaan, ten of the 
tribes were carried captive into Assyria, and have 
never returned or possessed their land unto this 
day. And again: although we hear no complaint 
upon this subject, the tribes of Judah and Benja- 
min were carried away captive to Babylon, where 
they remained " seventy years " deprived of their 
"inheritance." Furthermore, the Jews were never 
more strict in the observance of this rite than when 
the Roman army invaded their country, destroyed 
their city and temple, overthrew their national 
polity, and left a million of their inhabitants dead 
in their streets, while they sold into slavery about 
ninety-five thousand more, who have never since 
returned to their inheritance, their land being pos- 
sessed ever since by the Gentiles. How, then, was 
circumcision "the guaranteeing to them of the in- 
heritance," when they have so faithfully observed 
this painful duty, and yet have been deprived of 
their land ? We would suggest whether it was not 
in consequence of failing to "walk before God," as 
enjoined by the covenant of which circumcision 
was a "token," which deprived the seed of Abra- 
ham of their inheritance ? 
.3. He says that circumcision "occasioned a re- 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 135 

markable difference between Ishmael and Isaac, 
though sons of the same parent — the former being 
the son of his uncircumcision, the latter of his cir- 
cumcision, though they both circumcised them- 
selves." A more confused and contradictory sen- 
tence could not well be written than the above. 
How circumcision could cause Ishmael to be the 
son of his — Abraham's — uncircumcision, and Isaac 
to be the son of his circumcision, both having cir- 
cumcised themselves, is something rather beyond 
our comprehension. The above serves only to show 
how utterly impossible it is for anti-pedobaptists, 
denying the spiritual design of circumcision, to 
furnish any satisfactory reason for the entailment 
of this institution upon the posterity of the Jewish 
patriarchs by the Almighty God. 

II. We will now show the important religious 
interests subserved by circumcision. The visible 
Church of God was organized for the especial benefit 
of those who are invisibly connected with Christ, and 
sustain to him a justified relation; and so far as 
it is possible such persons should be connected with 
the Church visibly, so that their connection with 
Christ's body may be seen and known of all men, 
by the world as well as the Church. But, in order 
that this connection with the Church may be known, 
there must be some specified form of publicly and 
visibly receiving them as members. Now, we do not 
claim that circumcision, or any other Church ordi- 
nance, can bring the receiver into a justified state; 
but that such as were already in that state were to 



136 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

be circumcised as a visible acknowledgment of 
Church, relation and privileges : hence it is said of 
Abraham, "And he received the sign of circum- 
cision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which 
he had yet being uncircuincised." Eomans iv, 11 
And thus, too, his children were to be circumcised, 
at an age when they all sustained a justified relation 
to Christ — a relation which Christ declares all little 
children sustain, when he says, "Of such is the 
kingdom of heaven." The Lord says, " He that is 
eight days old shall be circumcised;" "Every man- 
child among you shall be circumcised;" "And 
the uncircumcised man-child shall be cut off from 
his people; he hath broken my covenant." 

To be cut off simply means excision from the 
Church, or congregation of the Lord, as will be 
seen by consulting Exodus xii, 15; Num. xv, 30; 
xix, 13; Exodus xxx, 33, 38; Lev. vii, 20, 21, 25, 
27; xvii, 4, 9; xix, 8: so that even the natural 
children of Abraham were not to be visibly acknowl- 
edged as members of the Church, or congregation, 
of the Lord, without the reception of the rite of 
initiation. The idea of being born into the Church 
has no authority from Scripture, as no child had a 
right to Church privileges on account of being born 
of believing parents till circumcised. 

Again: the "stranger" — not of Abraham's natu- 
ral seed — with his infant offspring, upon giving evi- 
dence of possessing the requisite spiritual qualifica- 
tions for membership, must be circumcised. The 
covenant reads, " He that is born in thy house, or 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 137 

bought with money of any stranger which is not of 
thy seed/' Gen. xvii, 12; "And when a stranger 
shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover 
to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and 
then let him come near and keep it; and he shall 
be as one born in the land : for no uncircumcised 
person shall eat thereof. One law shall be to him 
that is home-born, and to the stranger that sojourn- 
eth among you." Exodus xii, 48, 49. The pass- 
over being a sacrament of the Church, designed, at 
the same time, to remind them of their deliverance 
from Egypt, and to typify the Savior yet to be cru- 
cified and slain for sinners, was strictly reserved for 
the benefit of the members of the Church : hence 
all persons wishing to enjoy these Church privileges 
must be regularly inducted into the Church by cir- 
cumcision. 

Maimonides, a learned and ancient Jewish writer, 
says, "The second sort of converted Hebrews were 
called Proselytes of Justice. They were so called 
because they embraced the whole law of Moses, and 
engaged themselves to live holy and justly; and 
they, therefore, had the rank and privileges of nat- 
ural Jews. In order to become proselytes of jus- 
tice there were three things to be performed, the 
first of which was circumcision. The blood that 
was spilt in the performance of this was called the 
blood of the covenant; and these new converts 
were thought to be children of it. And as to the 
necessity of it, the command of God to Abraham is 
very express : circumcision was, as it were, the seal 



138 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

which sealed the covenant which the proselyte 
entered into with God. The second ceremony was 
washing, or baptism, which must have been per- 
formed in the presence of at least three Jews of 
distinction. 

"At the time of the performance of it, the prose- 
lyte declares his abhorrence of his past life, and 
that it was neither ambition nor avarice, but a sin- 
cere love for the law of Moses, which prevailed on 
him to be baptized. And he was then instructed in 
the most essential parts of the law of Moses. He 
promised, at the same time, to lead a godly life, to 
worship the true God, and to keep his command- 
ments.^ (See Manners and Customs of the An- 
cient Israelites.) 

From the above it will be seen : 

1. That the Gentile proselyte was required to 
renounce all worldly or temporal motives upon his 
reception into the Church of Israel. This shows 
conclusively that Israel was not merely a temporal 
compact, nor was circumcision wholly a temporal 
ceremony. 

2. Religion and religious privileges were the only 
motives which were allowed to incline them to the 
reception of this ordinance. "It was neither am- 
bition nor avarice, but a sincere love for the law of 
Moses, which prevailed on them." 

3. The preparatory instruction was all of a re- 
ligious character. 

4. The pledges were all religious. The candi- 
date was required to e( declare his abhorrence of his 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 139 

past life, to profess faith in the law of Moses, and 
engaged to live holy and justly/' and promised to 
worship the true God, and to keep his command- 
ments. 

5. Upon receiving circumcision and baptism, they 
were supposed to sustain precisely "the rank and 
privileges of natural Jews." But certainly these 
ordinances could not constitute Gentiles the natural 
children of Abraham ; they could only become his 
spiritual seed, and thus stand in the same spiritual 
relation to Abraham and the covenant, of a natural 
Jew. Indeed, they were " thought to be children 
of the covenant." 

6. The first and principal ordinance by which 
tjiis rank of a natural Jew and child of the cov- 
enant, was publicly and visibly acknowledged, was 
circumcision; and the u blood that was spilt in 
the performance, was called the blood of the cov- 
enant '/' and " circumcision was, as it were, the 
seal which sealed the covenant with the proselyte." 

7. The infant children of these converted Gen- 
tiles were circumcised with their parents, and upon 
the faith and pledges of their parents, just as 
though they were the children of Jewish parents. 
To believers, and their infant offspring, whether 
Jew or Gentile, was the ordinance of circumcision 
administered as a rite of initiation into the Church 
of God, and by which their right to Church mem- 
bership and privileges was secured. And without 
the reception of this ordinance, neither Jew nor 
Gentile, nor their children, were regarded as mem- 



140 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

bers, or entitled to the religious privileges of the 
Church of God. 

III. But here a most formidable objection meets 
us — one which, in some minds, will overthrow all 
the testimony we have brought, or can bring, to 
prove that circumcision was a rite of initiation of 
believers and their children into the Church of God. 
We will give the objection in the language of Mr. 
Campbell: " Males only were the subjects of cir- 
cumcision. All females were excluded from the 
blessings, if blessings they were, in the sign of 
whose flesh a man was clothed. I argue that there 
were no spiritual blessings in circumcision, else 
females had not been at all excluded. The God of 
Abraham never would, by a covenant seal, exclude 
them from spiritual blessings — from any thing tend- 
ing to their sanctification and salvation. Baptism 
certainly has not come in the room of circumcision 
in this particular." (Debate between Campbell and 
Bice.) 

1. In replying to the above, we would say, it is 
not claimed that there were any " blessings in cir- 
cumcision," itself considered. And this fact must 
have been known to Mr. C. Pedobaptists do not 
generally rely upon religious ordinances of any kind 
to bless them. They only regard these as types, or 
figures of good things promised in the covenant to 
which they belong, and as furnishing externally 
and visibly a legal evidence of their right to the 
"spiritual blessings" specified in the covenant. 
Circumcision, therefore, only contained "spiritual 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 141 

blessings," so far as it secured to the candidate the 
right to the "spiritual blessings" promised in the 
Abrabaniic covenant. 

2. Although females were not circumcised, yet 
females did, through their male relatives, as repre- 
sentatives in this matter, conform to this ordinance, 
so as to be legally entitled to membership in the 
Church of God, and to the "spiritual blessings" en- 
joyed by that Church, and secured to them by the 
covenant on which it was based. 

We have a very good parallel, from which to draw 
an illustration, in our state and national govern- 
ment. 

Females are subjects of this government. Their 
persons, property, and rights are protected by it; 
their civil and religious privileges are secure under 
it, and they are numbered in the general census 
when taken. And yet females never take an oath 
of allegiance to the government, and never vote for 
its officers, nor are they themselves eligible to office. 
They are, in these particulars, represented by their 
male relatives. And so it was in the Church of 
God under the old dispensation. Abraham was 
required to circumcise himself and his son, and to 
instruct, govern, and represent that son in the 
Church till old enough to be himself responsible to 
represent his wife and daughters in the Church, so 
as to secure their membership, and entitle them to 
its blessings and. privileges without circumcision. 
In all heathen countries the female is the slave of 
the father first, and of the husband next. In no 



142 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

instance is she allowed; either in civil or religious 
privileges, to stand upon a level with her male rela- 
tives. It was the design of the Creator in the es- 
tablishment of his Church to elevate mankind by 
its agency, civilly, morally, and religiously; and es- 
pecially to do so with females, who, it seems, stood 
more particularly in need of elevation. But all such 
improvements must of necessity be gradual. Hence, 
the Jewish dispensation stands about midway be- 
tween heathenism, with which it was preceded and 
surrounded, and the Gospel dispensation, with which 
it was succeeded. And hence, all the ordinances 
and institutions of Judaism contemplated the grad- 
ual elevation of mankind from the exceedingly low 
and wretched condition in which they had previ- 
ously lived, to a state preparatory to the dispensa- 
tion of the Gospel. And when the Gospel dispen- 
sation succeeded to Judaism, her ordinances and 
institutions were modified for the purpose of giving 
a still higher scale of character to mankind than 
they had ever before enjoyed. And as this dispen- 
sation continues, that elevating process will con- 
tinue. 

Females were elevated under the Jewish dispen- 
sation very far above their sex in the surrounding 
heathen world, although they were dependent upon 
their male relatives to represent them both in 
Church and state, and through whom they enjoyed 
all the blessings of a Church relation, as well as 
civil privileges in the government. 

Females, therefore, were not, as Mr. Campbell 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 143 

asserts, excluded from the u spiritual blessings of 
circumcision." They enjoyed all the blessings, 
without any of the burdens of this ordinance. 

3. As the Gospel dispensation was designed to 
elevate the members of the Church of God, and 
especially the female members, and to make them 
more responsible personally for their privileges in 
the Church, it was important that the ordinance of 
initiation should be changed in form, so that both 
sexes could personally receive it. Hence the sub- 
stitution of baptism instead of circumcision. So 
that the objection so often raised by anti-pedobap- 
tists, and the one on which they mostly rely, when 
fully understood, turns directly against them, and 
furnishes us with an obvious reason for the change. 
But we must pay our respects to Mr. Campbell once 
more on this point, for it is one to which he clings 
with great pertinacity. He says, " Circumcision was 
not the door into any Church or religious institu- 
tion. It was no initiatory rite into any moral insti- 
tution. The Ishmaelites, and Edomites, and many 
other nations by Keturah were circumcised. Into 
what Church did they enter ? The Jews were mem- 
bers of the politico-ecclesiastico Church by natural 
birth. Circumcision was no initiatory rite or door 
to them. But none can enter Christ's Church un- 
less 'born again ' — 'born from above/ How, then, 
are the two Churches identical?" 

(1.) Mr. Campbell asserts that u circumcision was 
not the door into any Church or religious institu- 
tion," because "the Ishmaelites, and Edomites, and 



144 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

many other nations by Keturah were circumcised f % 
and then asks, "Into what Church did they enter?" 

I answer, without hesitancy, that Ishmael and 
Ezra entered the Church of God, instituted by 
"God in Christ," in the house and family of Abra- 
ham. And from what we can learn of their moral 
and religious character, they were, at the time, 
among its brightest ornaments, believing in, and wor- 
shiping, with their venerable father, the God of the 
patriarchs; and although their descendants aposta- 
tized into the grossest idolatry, retaining only the 
initiatory sign, and were evidently disowned of 
Heaven, and cast out of his Church, this was no more 
than what happened to thousands of the descendants 
of Isaac, and of Israel, and has happened a thousand 
times among baptized Christians under the dispen- 
sation of the Gospel ; for circumcision, no more than 
baptism, can constitute a person a member for life, 
in the Church, unless his moral and religious con- 
duct corresponds with the requirements of the 
Abrahamic covenant, which were, to "walk before 
God" and "be perfect." 

(2.) Mr. Campbell was very unfortunate in assert- 
ing that "the Jews were members of the politico- 
ecclesiastico Church by natural birth" — unfortu- 
nate, because it is not true. The covenant says, 
"And the un circumcised man-child whose flesh of 
his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be 
cut off form his people." Gen. xvii, 14. 

No one, whether Jew or Gentile, infant or adult, 
was entitled to the privileges of the Church till he 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 145 

was circumcised. And if even the son of believing 
Abraham was not circumcised, he was to be "cut* 
off from his people." Where, then, was membership 
by natural birth? 

(3.) But the most unhappy assertion of all was, 
that " circumcision was no initiatory rite into any 
moral institution." What, does he not consider the 
" Church in the wilderness," built by "God in 
Christ," requiring its members to "walk before God 
and be perfect," and to whom was given the moral 
law, the purest rule of life ever given to man, not 
a moral institution ! 

But perhaps he did not mean to say that the 
"congregation of the Lord" was not a moral insti- 
tution, but that circumcision was not the "initia- 
tory rite into this moral institution." But if so, 
we would ask, what was the initiatory rite into it ? 
iFor even a "politico-ecclesiastico Church," without 
any initiatory rite, would be a strange affair. If 
circumcision was not that rite, why did he not show 
what it was? This was impossible; for no other 
institution of the Old Testament bears any such 
relation to the "Church in the wilderness." 

But we think the evidence already adduced suf- 
ficient on this subject. Circumcision was the rite 
of initiation into the Church of God from its forma- 
tion down to the commencement of the new dispen- 
sation. 



10 



146 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 



SECTION II. 

circumcision was a " token" of a covenant relation with 

god; a "sign" of inward purity; and a "seal" 

of the righteousness of faith. 

Circumcision subserved a variety of important 
religious purposes, a few of which we will now de- 
scribe. 

I. It was a token of a solemn covenant relation 
to God: "And it shall be a token of the covenant 
betwixt me and you." G-en. xvii, 11. The solemn 
import of the token depends upon the grave char- 
acter of the subjects and interests in reference to 
which the high contracting parties bound them- 
selves in the covenant. These subjects are pre- 
sented in detail in Part I, Sec. II, of this work. 
Other instances are on record of covenants, with 
their appointed tokens, calculated to illustrate this. 
Thus, when the Lord had drowned the world with 
a flood of water, he appeared to Noah, and said, 
"I will establish my covenant with you; neither 
shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of 
a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to 
destroy the earth. And God said, This is the token 
of the covenant which I make between me and you, 
and every living creature that is with you, for per- 
petual generations : I do set my bow in the cloud, 
and it shall be for a token of a covenant between 
me and the earth." Gen. ix, 11-13. Here the 
Lord obligates himself in a most solemn covenant 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 147 

made with Noah, not again to "cut off all flesh by 
the waters of a flood f and his "bow in the cloud 
shall be a token" of the above covenant engage- 
ment. And, whenever the glittering rainbow is 
seen, by the descendants of Noah, encircling the 
heavens, it betokens to them the faithfulness of a 
covenant-keeping God. And so in the Abrahamic 
covenant, as developed in the seventeenth chapter 
of Genesis. In this covenant we have seen, 

1. A precept, obligating Abraham, and whoever 
else should stand in the same relation to it, to 
"walk before God" and to "be perfect." 

2. A promise, obligating the "Almighty God" to 
be the God of Abraham, and of his seed forever, 
etc., specifying various things embraced in the 
promise. 

8. A rite, betokening to Abraham and his seed, 
on whom this token was forever to be found, the 
above solemn engagements. In a subsequent period 
in their history, we see the "blood" sprinkled upon 
the "door-posts" of the tents of Israel, furnishing 
a "token" of God's engagement to pass over the 
camp of Israel, in the destruction of the first-born 
of Egypt, 

In each of the above cases, the subjects, or inter- 
ests, about which the covenant is made, determine 
the character, both of the covenant and of its token. 
If these interests are temporal, civil, or spiritual, 
the token must be of the same nature. Therefore, 
as the interests embraced, both in the precept and 
promise of the Abrahamic covenant, are of the 



148 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

highest spiritual character, so must the token, also, 
be of the highest spiritual nature. 

II. It was a sign — an outward sign in the flesh — ■ 
of inward holiness of heart. Hence, St. Paul says, 
"he [Abraham] received the sign of circumcision," 
etc. The term sign is so familiar to the Bible stu- 
dent as scarcely to need an illustration. In reveal- 
ing his will to man, Grod accommodated himself to 
man's weakness, by employing the most striking 
and appropriate figures, or signs of heavenly things; 
thus presenting to our minds his spiritual truth, by 
descriptive temporal things. This is especially 
true of the Old Testament Scriptures. 

And indeed nearly all of the religious ordinances 
and worship of the Old Testament were typical, or 
figurative, of good things promised to the faithful. 
Now, we find that holiness of heart, such as was en- 
joined upon Abraham and his seed, in the precept 
of the covenant, was frequently urged upon the 
congregation of Israel, through the means of cir- 
cumcision, its divinely-appointed sign. "Circum- 
cise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no 
more stiff-necked." Deut. x, 16. "And the Lord 
thy Grod will circumcise thine heart, and the heart 
of thy seed, to love the Lord thy Glod with all thy 
heart and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live." 
Deut. xxx, 6. An ancient Jewish author has said, 
"Circumcision is a divine sign, which Grod has 
placed on the member of concupiscence, to the end 
that we may overcome evil desire. (Liber Cosri, 
Part I, C. 115, p. 70.) 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 149 

In the above Scriptures Moses describes a very 
high state of Christian holiness, a complete change 
of the heart, that they might "be no more stiff- 
necked/' as well as the filling the heart with divine 
love, so that they could "love the Lord their God 
with all their heart, and with all their soul/' and 
that they might "live" spiritually here, and eter- 
nally with God hereafter. And all this is de- 
nominated " circumcising the heart," etc., simply 
because circumcision was its divinely-appointed 
covenant sign. The familiar manner, too, in which 
the term is used, without explanation, shows how 
perfectly well the descendants of the patriarchs un- 
derstood the import of this sign in their flesh. It 
was not to designate them as Abraham's natural 
seed, but to remind them of the holiness of heart 
and life of which it was the appropriate sign. 
Jer. iv, 4 : " Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and 
take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Ju- 
dah and inhabitants of Jerusalem; lest my fury 
come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench 
it, because of the evil of your doings." Circumcis- 
ion could not change the heart, nor turn away Di- 
vine wrath, or save the inhabitants of Judah or 
Jerusalem; but the grace of God upon the heart 
could do all this, which grace was then at their 
command; hence, the term circumcise is here again 
used in its true figurative sense, as a sign of inward 
holiness. Romans ii, 28, 29 : "For he is not a Jew, 
which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcis- 
ion, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, 



150 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

winch, is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of 
the heart." Christians in all ages have been prone 
to rest in outward ordinances, and to neglect the 
inward grace of which they are but the sign. This 
was the condition of the Jews in the days of Christ 
and of his apostles. Hence the admonition in the 
above passage, and the effort to direct the attention 
of the Jews through the sign to the spiritual sub- 
stance signified. And other similar efforts were 
made by the same apostle — Colossians ii, 11 — "In 
whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision 
made without hands, in putting off the body of the 
sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." As 
Dr. Clarke says, "All that was designed by circum- 
cision, literally performed, is accomplished in them 
that believe through the Spirit and power of 
Christ." Enough testimony, I trust, has been pro- 
duced to show that circumcision was not only an 
outward sign in the flesh of Abraham, directing his 
attention to the inward holiness, by the possession 
of which alone he could be enabled to "walk before 
God and to be perfect," but also to show that it was 
a "sign" of the same in the flesh of all his seed. 

III. It was a seal of the righteousness of faith. 
Romans iv, 11: "And he received the sign of cir- 
cumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith 
which he had being yet uncircumcised." Genesis 
xv, 6, we read, "And he [Abraham] believed in 
the Lord, and he counted it to him for righteous- 
ness." Abraham was accounted righteous before 
God in consequence of his faith in God, as much 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 151 

so as though lie had never sinned. And then in 
Genesis — xvii, 26 — after the covenant was made, 
confirmed, and explained to him, Abraham, as a 
believer in God, received the rite of circumcision, 
not only as a rite of initiation to Church privileges ; 
a token of a most solemn covenant relation to God; 
a sign of inward holiness ; but also as a seal or con- 
firmation of the previous faith by which he was 
accounted righteous. 

A celebrated Jewish rabbin, in the book of Zohar, 
as quoted by Ainsworth, gives the following account 
of circumcision as a seal, not only as applied to 
Abraham, but also to his seed. "At what time a 
man is sealed with this holy seal, [of circumcision,] 
thenceforth he seeth the holy and blessed God prop- 
erly, and the holy soul is united to him. If he be 
not worthy, and keepeth not this sign, what is writ- 
ten ? By the breath of God they perish — Job iv, 
9 — because this seal of the holy blessed God was 
not kept. But if he be worthy and keep it, the 
Holy Ghost is not separated from hirn." 

1. The candidate must be "worthy;" that is, 
righteous. If an adult, he is made righteous 
through faith in God. If a child, he is made 
righteous without faith, through Christ's atonement 
and grace. 

2. If worthy r , the "holy soul is united to God," 
and by faith "thenceforth he seeth the holy and 
blessed God properly," and the Holy Ghost is not 
separated from him. And circumcision was the 
"holy seal" of this righteousness. 



152 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

In closing this section we will invite the close 
attention of the reader to the following important 
facts : 

1. It has been proven that the Abraharnic cov- 
enant provided for its own perpetuity, including its 
rite. Genesis xvii, 13: "And my covenant shall 
be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant." In 
the flesh of Abraham's spiritual seed, embracing all 
believers in Christ, and their infant offspring, must 
the token of God's covenant with Abraham forever 
be seen. The God of Abraham obligates himself 
here never to abrogate that token, and Abraham's 
seed are never to neglect its observance; it " shall 
be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant." 

2. Although circumcision was appointed as the 
form of that token at the time the covenant was 
made by the high contracting parties, yet it is not 
said that circumcision should be the form of this 
token forever. The same authority, therefore, that 
made the covenant and appointed circumcision its 
token, could change so as to improve the form of 
the token, but could not disannul either the cov- 
enant or its token. The token, in some form, must 
continue with the covenant through all time; so 
that all of Abraham's spiritual seed can have it in 
their flesh for an everlasting covenant. 

3. Inasmuch as circumcision was laid aside by 
the authority of Christ and his apostles, some other 
and more appropriate form of the covenant must 
have, by the same authority, succeeded it. The 
truth, the covenant, and oath of God require either 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 153 

the continuance of the old form of the token, or in 
its stead a better one. 

4. If Christian baptism does not succeed cir- 
cumcision as an improved form of the token of the 
everlasting covenant; what ordinance now in prac- 
tice among the spiritual seed of Abraham has taken 
its place ? And by what means can Abraham's seed 
show the token of their covenant relation to God 
in their flesh? We demand an answer to this 
inquiry. 

5. It will not answer to cavil, as our opponents 
sometimes do, by pointing to the differences existing 
between these two forms of the token. Mr. Camp- 
bell presents sixteen particulars in which circum- 
cision and baptism differ. But differing in a thou- 
sand little particulars does not prove that the one 
does not succeed and take the place of the other, 
answering in a few general particulars the same 
ends and signifying the same things that the other 
did. Why, let me ask, should a change be made, 
if the one that succeeds must, in every particular, 
resemble the former? Why not continue the old 
one? We have supposed that it was because cir- 
cumcision was, in many respects, an unsuitable 
institution to accompany the Gospel throughout the 
world; that it was succeeded by one much more 
appropriate, and, therefore, in some respects, differ- 
ing from its antecedent. If so, where, then, is the 
propriety of so much harping upon the difference 
between the two ordinances. It looks very much 
like an effort to draw attention from arguments that 



154 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

are unanswerable. But we can not devote further 
time to this point in the general argument, and 
shall close by simply reminding the reader that we 
have presented very important spiritual interests 
subserved by circumcision, thereby establishing its 
spiritual character and design. 



SECTION III. 

PROSELYTE BAPTISM AND THE BAPTISM OF JOHN CONSIDERED. 

The origin of proselyte baptism is very much 
vailed in obscurity; the Jews, however, claim that 
the practice among them was very ancient, probably 
from Moses. 

I. The first Scriptural baptism on record, is the 
baptism of the Israelites, and is thus described by 
St. Paul: " Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye 
should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were 
under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 
and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and 
in the sea." 1 Corinthians x, 1, 2. Mr. Wesley 
explains the second verse thus: " And ivere all, as 
it were, baptized unto Hoses — initiated into the relig- 
ion which he taught them." Dr. Clarke says, 
" Rather into 3Ioses — into the covenant of which 
Moses was the mediator; and by this typical bap- 
tism they were brought under the obligation of act- 
ing according to the Mosaic precepts, as Christians 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 155 

receiving Christian baptism are said to be baptized 
into Christ, and are thereby brought under obliga- 
tion to keep the precepts of the Gospel." (Com- 
ments on 1 Corinthians x, 1, 2.) Thus was the 
whole congregation of Israel, male and female, par- 
ents and children, baptized at once into Moses. 

II. Different baptisms were instituted by Moses 
while in the wilderness, and subsequently practiced 
by the Israelites. St. Paul thus speaks of them : 
"Which, stood only in meats and drinks, and divers 
washings" — partita pots, baptisms. These baptisms 
were, some of them, religious, and some of them 
were only designed for cleanliness and health. But 
none of them constituted the true proselyte bap- 
tism, so long and so frequently administered among 
the Jews to Gentile converts. 

III. Moses says, " One law shall be to him that 
is home-born, and to the stranger that sojourneth 
among you." Ex. xii, 49. Israel was initiated into 
the Abrahamic covenant by circumcision, and into 
the religion of Moses by baptism in the cloud, after 
which she offered sacrifices. Hence, as the same 
law must be applied to the " stranger," all converted 
Gentiles were from this time both circumcised and 
baptized } confirming both by a sacrifice. These 
facts are recorded by Maimonides, the great inter- 
preter of Jewish law, as follows : 

"Israel was admitted into the covenant by three 
things; namely, by circumcision, baptism, and sac- 
rifice. Circumcision was in Egypt; as it is said, 
None uncircumcised shall eat of the passover. 



156 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Baptism was in the wilderness, before the giving of 
the law, as it is said, Thou shalt sanctify them to- 
day and to-morrow, and let them wash their gar- 
ments. . . . And so in all ages, when a Gentile is 
willing to enter into a covenant, and gather himself 
under the wings of the majesty of God, and take 
on him the yoke of the law, he must be circumcised, 
and baptized, and bring a sacrifice, as it is writ- 
ten, <As you are, so shall the stranger be/ How 
are you? By circumcision, and baptism, and bring- 
ing a sacrifice. So also the stranger, [or proselyte,] 
through cdl generations ; by circumcision, and bap- 
tism, and bringing a sacrifice." 

Again, he says, "The second sort of converted 
Hebrews were called Proselytes of Justice. They 
were so called, because they embraced the whole 
law of Moses, and engaged themselves to live holy 
and justly; and they, therefore, had the rank and 
privileges of natural Jews. In order to become 
proselytes of justice, there were three things to be 
performed; the first of which was circumcision. 
The blood that was spilt in the performance of this 
was called the blood of the covenant, and these new 
converts were thought to be children of it. And 
as to the necessity of it, the command of God to 
Abraham is very express: circumcision was, as it 
were, the seal which sealed the covenant with the 
proselyte entered into with God. The second cere- 
mony was washing, or baptism, which must have 
been performed in the presence of at least three 
Jews of distinction. At the time of the perform- 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 157 

ance of it, the proselyte declares liis abhorrence of 
his past life, and that it was neither ambition nor 
avarice, but a sincere love for the law of Moses 
which prevailed on him to be baptized/' etc. (Man- 
ners and Customs of the Ancient Israelites.) 

11 Whenever any heathen will betake himself and 
be joined to the covenant of Israel, and place him- 
self under the wings of the divine Majesty, and 
take the yoke of the law upon him, voluntary cir- 
cumcision, baptism, and oblation were required; 
but if it be a woman, baptism and oblation. That 
was a 'common axiom, h)2W) L AW iy 1J JV8 — no man 
is a proselyte till he be circumcised and baptized." 
(Jevamoth, fol. 46.) 

"They assert that an infinite number of prose- 
lytes, in the days of David and Solomon, were ad- 
mitted by baptism. The Sanhedrim received not 
proselytes in the days of David and Solomon; not 
in the days of David, lest they should betake them- 
selves to proselytism out of a fear of the kingdom 
of Israel; not in the days of Solomon, lest they 
might do the same by reason of the glory of the 
kingdom. And yet abundance of proselytes were 
made, in the days of David and Solomon, before 
private men : and the great Sanhedrim was full of 
care about this business; for they would not cast 
them out of the Church, because they were bap- 
tized." (Maimonides Issure Biah, C. 13.) 

Dr. Lightfoot, speaking of John's baptism, says : 
"But yet the first use of baptism was not exhibited 
at that time; for baptism, very many centuries back, 



158 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

had been both known and received in most frequent 
use among the Jews; and for the very same end as 
it now obtains among Christians ; namely, that by 
it proselytes might be introduced into the Church; 
and hence it was called jTTJ fi L ?'Ot9, baptism for prose- 
lytism, and was distinct from D1J fiboft, baptism, 
or to ashing from uncleanness." (See the Babylonian 
Talmud in Jevamoth.) 

Again, he says, "You see baptism inseparably 
joined to the circumcision of proselytes. There 
was, indeed, some little distance of time; for they 
were not baptized till the pain of circumcision was 
healed, because water might be injurious to the wound, 
but certain baptism ever followed. We acknowledge, 
indeed, that circumcision was plainly of Divine in- 
stitution; but by whom baptism, which was insepa- 
rable from it, was instituted is doubtful. And yet, 
it is worthy of observation, our Savior rejected cir- 
cumcision, and retained the appendix baptism; and 
when all the Gentiles were now to be instructed into 
the true religion, he preferred this proselytical intro- 
ductory — pardon the expression — unto the sacra- 
ment of entrance into the Gospel. One might ob- 
serve the same almost in the eucharist. The lamb 
in the passover was of Divine institution, and so 
indeed was the bread; but whence was the wine? 
But yet, rejecting the lamb, Christ instituted the 
sacrament in the bread and wine." A very appro- 
priate and striking parallel, indeed. 

The same author, speaking of the difference be- 
tween the Jewish baptisms for cleansing, and this 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 159 

proselyte baptism, says, " If you compare the wash- 
ing of polluted persons prescribed by the law with 
the baptism of proselytes, both that and this im- 
ply uncleanness : however, something different; that 
implies legal uncleanness, this heathen, but both 
polluting. But a proselyte was baptized not only 
into the washing away of that Gentile pollution, 
nor only thereby to be transplanted into the religion 
of the Jews, but that, by the most accurate rite of 
translation that could possibly be, he might so pass 
into an Israelite that, being married to an Israelite 
woman, he might produce a free and legitimate 
seed, and an undefiled offspring." (See Clarke's 
comments at the end of Mark.) 

1. We learn from the above the most probable 
origin of proselyte baptism — it is clearly traced back 
to Moses, with whom it most likely originated — 
to bring Gentile proselytes into the same relation 
to the religion of Moses, that the Israelites were 
brought by being baptized unto Moses. 

2. That baptism accompanied circumcision from 
Moses to Christ as the associated rite of initiation, 
covenant token, sign, and seal, and for these purposes 
was administered especially to females, to whom cir- 
cumcision was not applicable. 

3. That proselyte baptism differed essentially from 
the " diverse washings," or baptisms, practiced by 
the Jews for various legal purifications. 

IV. The baptism of John differed from both 
proselyte and Jewish baptisms. Dr. Lightfoot, on 
this subject, says, "The baptism of proselytes was 



160 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

the bringing over of Gentiles into the Jewish relig- 
ion ; the baptism of John was the bringing over of 
the Jews into another religion ; and hence it is the 
more to be wondered at that the people so readily 
flocked to him when he introduced a baptism so dif- 
ferent from the known proselytical baptism, the 
reason of which is to be fetched from hence, that 
at the coming of the Messiah they thought, not 
without cause, that the state of things was plainly 
to be changed, and that from the oracles of the 
prophets, who with one mouth described the times 
of the Messiah for a new world. 

"The baptism of proselytes was an obligation to 
perform the law; that of John was an obligation to 
repentance . . — Mark i, 4 — which being undertaken, 
they who were baptized professed to renounce their 
own legal righteousness, and, on the contrary, ac- 
knowledged themselves to be obliged to repentance 
and faith in the Messiah to come. 

"John's baptism was either an entirely new insti- 
tution, designed only for a particular purpose, and 
was discontinued when that object was accomplished, 
or it was taken from some of the numerous baptisms 
practiced among the Jews, and modified so as to 
suit the peculiar mission of John, and which ceased, 
with other Jewish baptisms, at the commencement 
of the new dispensation." 

We incline to the opinion that John's baptism 
was a new institution, differing from any baptism 
with which it was preceded. It was the preparing 
the way of the Lord by enjoining repentance and 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 1G1 

faith in the Messiah at hand. Nothing like it was 
practiced in the Old Testament times, with or with- 
out Divine appointment. Like John himself, it had 
a peculiar mission. 

V. John's baptism was not the true Christian bap- 
tism. 

1. John baptized Jews only, while Christian bap- 
tism is for both Jews and Gentiles. 

2. John baptized in the name or authority of 
God, while Christian baptism is applied in the name 
of the Holy Trinity. 

3. John baptized into no name; Christian baptism 
is into as well as in the name of the Holy Trinity. 

4. John's baptism did not initiate his subjects 
into the Church of either dispensation; all of them 
nominally belonged already, while Christian baptism 
is the ordinance of initiation under the Gospel. 

5. Though all Judea and Jerusalem received bap- 
tism of John in Jordan, not one of them, on that 
account, was exempt from Christian baptism. See 
Acts xix, 1-5. St. Paul at Corinth said, "Have 
ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed ? And. 
they said unto him, We have not so much as heard 
whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said 
unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized ? And 
they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, 
John verily baptized with the baptism of repent- 
ance, saying unto the people, that they should be- 
lieve on him which should come after him, that is, 
on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were 
baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. " 

11 



162 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

"I know/' says Mr. Campbell, "to what tortures 
this passage has been subjected by such cold, cloudy, 
and sickening commentators as John Gill. But no 
man can, with any regard to the grammar of lan- 
guage, or the import of the most definite words, 
make Luke say, that when these twelve men heard 
Paul declare the design of Christian baptism, they 
were not baptized into the name of the Lord 
Jesus. " 

We have now examined all the different baptisms 
practiced among the Jews, from Moses to John the 
Baptist, and have ascertained their probable origin 
and design. The question which we here leave for 
the reader to ponder, is, from which of these did 
Jesus Christ most probably take the baptism insti- 
tuted in his Gospel ? 



SECTION IV. 

CIRCUMCISION WAS DISCONTINUED, AND THE BAPTISM WHICH HAD 

ACCOMPANIED IT WAS IMPROVED AND SUBSTITUTED AS 

THE BITE OF INITIATION, ETC., BY THE 

AUTHORITY OF JESUS CHRIST. 

We now approach a very important point in the 
present discussion, the connecting of the two ordi- 
nances. We have already proven their parallel 
connection from Moses to Christ, in their applica- 
tion to Jewish proselytes; but the most critical point 
is to show their successive connection, that baptism 
was not only made to succeed, but also to supersede 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 163 

circumcision, as a different form of the same ordi- 
nance, under the same covenant, and signifying the 
same thing. 

We claim not that the same names were applied; 
that baptism was called a token, a sign, or a seal. 
Names are only important as they aid in describing 
the character and relation of an object; and other 
modes of proof are equally conclusive. 

Jesus Christ was the only being clothed with 
authority to make the change, and he only at lib- 
erty to change so as to improve the former covenant 
token. We have proven the continuance of the 
covenant, the fulfillment of its promise, and the per- 
petuity of its rite under the dispensation of the 
Gospel. The Gospel, in fact, was but the consum- 
mation of all the blessings and privileges, so far as 
this world can experience their fulfillment, prom- 
ised in the Abrahamic covenant in behalf of the 
Church of God. 

We are not merely to show that a resemblance is 
traceable between the two ordinances, but to prove 
that the one succeeds to the place and office of the 
other. Remote analogies are not sufficient; an exact 
unity of purpose and import must be traced between 
them, and baptism must be shown to come in the 
place of circumcision. 

As this is an important link in the general argu- 
ment, it is not surprising that it has been strongly 
contested. H The reader is admonished of the im- 
portance of enlarged views of the Divine economy in 
treating subjects of this nature. He should bring 



164 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

to the investigation a disciplined and candid mind. 
Nothing is more pitiful, or unworthy the dignity, or 
irrelevant to the weakness and dependence of our un- 
derstandings, than for us, on our first approach to a 
subject, or on a merely-partial knowledge of its con- 
nections and bearings, and before we have entered 
into the wide and extensive designs of Grod, to de- 
mand or expect the same posture of things with re- 
spect to clearness and evidence, as if the present had 
no connection with the past, by which it might re- 
ceive explanation. The great Author of all things 
acts upon a wise, established plan, wherein one part 
has relation to the other. To understand, therefore, 
any part of the works or ways of Grod, we must un- 
derstand others which stand connected with it. 
G-od has not seen fit, in the world of nature, or in 
the dispensations of his moral government, to es- 
tablish each particular fact upon a separate and 
independent ground of proof, but by establishing a 
just connection between all the several parts of a 
vast economy, one thing is thus made, by the nature 
of the case, to prove and illustrate the other. Thus, 
in directing to a certain line of duty, he does not 
always lay down that formal proof of facts, as if 
nothing had subsisted in all his former dispensa- 
tions to establish faith and enjoin obedience touch- 
ing this particular thing, but evidently takes into 
account the just amount of information that may 
be derived from his former acts, and adduces only 
what may be lacking to complete the revelation. 
Nothing can be more prejudicial to just views of 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 165 

God and his works, than to suppose his successive 
acts and dispensations are but so many unconnected 
and independent effects put forth from time to time 
to meet existing exigencies, and not constituting a 
regular, progressive development of one wise, broad, 
comprehensive plan." (Hib. on Bap., pp. 61, 62.) 

"The wisdom of God, in the arrangement of suc- 
cessive dispensations, seems averse to sudden and 
violent innovations, rarely introducing new rites 
without incorporating something of the old. As, 
by the introduction of the Mosaic, the simple ritual 
of the patriarchal dispensation was not so properly 
abolished, as amplified and extended into a prefigu- 
ration of good things to come, in which the worship 
by sacrifices, and the distinction of animals into 
clean and unclean, reappeared under a new form , 
so the era of immediate preparation was distin- 
guished by a ceremony not entirely new, but de- 
rived from the purifications of the law, applied to a 
special purpose. Our Lord incorporated the same 
rite into his religion, newly modified and adapted 
to the peculiar views and objects of the Christian 
economy, in conjunction with another positive insti- 
tution, the rudiments of which are perceptible in 
the passover. It seemed suitable to his wisdom, by 
such gentle gradations, to conduct his Church from 
an infantine state to a state of maturity and per- 
fection." (Robert Hall's Works, vol. i, p. 303.) 

The great commission given by Christ to his apos- 
tles, which we will now proceed to investigate, will 
throw some light upon this subject: " And Jesus 



166 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

came, and spake unto them, saying, All power is 
given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, 
therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in 
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost ." Matt, xxviii, 18, 19. 

1. Christ says, "All power is given unto me 
in heaven and in earth/ ' When he appeared to 
Abram, and entered into covenant with him, he 
said, "X am the Almighty God." Here, then, is 
the same being that made the covenant with Abra- 
ham, clothed with omnipotence. And that omnip- 
otence pledged to Abraham, to "pour out blessings 
upon his seed, richly, abundantly, continually" is 
now employed in the fulfillment of this stupendous 
pledge. 

2. He says to the apostles, and to all that suc- 
ceed them, "Go ye, therefore, and teach all na- 
tions," etc. On the word fia^tsvaats — teach — Dr. 
Clarke says, "Make disciples of all nations." Mr. 
Wesley says, "Go ye, and disciple all nations." Mr. 
Campbell also translates it, "Disciple all nations." 
(Debate between Campbell and Rice, p. 380.) The 
apostles were commissioned, then, to " disciple all 
nations" to Christ. And St. Paul says, "If ye be 
Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs ac- 
cording to the promise." Gal. iii, 29. " The 
promise" was, a "father of many nations have I 
made thee." When, therefore, the commission of 
the apostles is fulfilled, and "all nations are disci- 
pled to Christ," then will the promise made to 
Abraham be fulfilled; he will be a "father of many 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 167 

nations/' even all nations. Christ, then, was simply 
providing for the full development and fulfillment 
of the covenant made with Abraham, concerning 
his seed, in the commission given to his apostles to 
" disciple all nations/' 

3. He says, " Baptizing them/' etc. Now, let 
the reader carefully review the following proven 
facts : 

(1.) When Christ appeared to Abraham, he cov- 
enanted with him, that all that Christ should par- 
don and adopt as his, in all nations, and through all 
time, should constitute his "seed." 

(2.) That seed must forever bear in its flesh a 
token of this covenant engagement. 

(3.) Circumcision was, then, appointed as said 
covenant token, without saying how long it should 
continue to subserve that interest. 

(4.) As the children of Israel were crossing the 
Eed Sea, they were "baptized unto Moses/' and 
the same law being binding upon the stranger, all 
converted Gentiles were both circumcised and 
baptized. 

(5.) This same Jesus Christ appears among men 
at the time appointed, connected with the seed of 
Abraham, and dies for the sins of the world, ac- 
cording as he had obligated himself to do in the 
covenant with Abraham, and now convenes his apos- 
tles for the very purpose of making provision for 
the enlargement of Abraham's seed, as he had also 
promised in the covenant to do; and charges those 
apostles most solemnly, as they discipled all nations, 



168 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

to "baptize theni," they being the very seed that 
must forever exhibit in their flesh the token of the 
Abrahamic covenant. True, he says nothing here 
about circumcision. Nor was it necessary to incum- 
ber the apostles' commission with an explanation of 
each particular point, when he had before promised 
them the "Spirit" which should "lead them into all 
truth/' etc. 

A case exactly parallel to this is found in the 
paschal supper. In that supper, as instituted by 
Moses, and practiced by the Jews till Christ came, 
the first thing of importance was the killing and eat- 
ing of the paschal lamb. Next came the "unleav- 
ened bread," the " bitter herbs," etc. But the use 
of pure, unfermented wine — whether by Divine ap- 
pointment or not, we can not tell, any more than we 
can the baptizing of proselytes — was connected, as 
an appropriate appendage, with the lamb and the 
unleavened bread, etc. And yet, at the last paschal 
supper before his death, "as they were eating, Jesus 
took bread and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it 
to the disciples and said, Take, eat; this is my 
body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and 
gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this 
is my blood of the new testament, which is shed 
for many for the remission of sins." Matt, xxvi, 
26-28. Here no mention is made of the paschal 
lamb, either continuing or discontinuing it, any 
more than circumcision is mentioned in the former 
case. And yet this fact, together with the manifest 
inappropriateness of the use of the lamb as a Gos- 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 169 

pel ordinance, has ever since been regarded as suf- 
ficient evidence that it was to be discontinued, as a 
type of the Savior's death; and as the wine is a more 
befitting emblem, and is expressly enjoined for that 
specific purpose, the Church of Christ has universally 
asked no further proof that wine, in the sacrament, 
takes the place of the paschal lamb. On precisely 
similar testimony do we claim that Christ, in his 
commission to his apostles to disciple all nations, 
thereby constituting them Abraham's seed, accord- 
ing to the covenant promise, and enjoining baptism 
upon all these persons, put it in the place of cir- 
cumcision, which, up to this time, was, by Divine 
appointment, received by all the seed of the patri- 
arch. This is certainly the view of this whole sub- 
ject taken by St. Paul: "For as many of you as 
have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there, is neither 
bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for 
ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be 
Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs ac- 
cording to the promise. " 

1. The apostle here describes the spiritual seed 
of Abraham; that it embraced all that are Christ's. 

2. He contrasts their condition under the two 
dispensations. Now, there is no distinction, as for- 
merly, between Jew and Greek; no such relation as 
bond and free; nor any difference between male and 
female; they were "all one in Christ Jesus ;' ; and, 
being his, were "Abraham's seed." 

3. This joint relation to Christ and Abraham was 



170 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

entered into by baptism, being " baptized into 
Christ." The identical relation to Christ and 
Abraham, into which, under the former dispensa- 
tion, the same class of persons were inducted by 
circumcision and baptism as its appendage. 

"It seems not to have been duly considered by 
our opponents, that from the earliest records of 
history God has delivered his commands to men 
through various means, and in somewhat varied 
kinds of evidence. If we attentively examine into 
the ground of evidence we have for various beliefs, 
we shall find that, while for some we have the war- 
rant of a Divine positive precept or declaration, for 
others we have only the authority of historical tes- 
timony and inductive reasoning. And these re- 
marks apply not merely to forms and accidental 
usages, but to cardinal and important subjects. We 
make these remarks, not to intimate a suspicion that 
there is any want of evidence in any part of reve- 
lation, but to direct attention to the fact that all 
duties are not sustained by the same kind of evi- 
dence." (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, pp. 83, 84.) 

"Admitting, as we must, that all positive relig- 
ious rites are originally founded on a Divine com- 
mand, we can not safely conclude that such a com- 
mand will be repeated to all those who shall after- 
ward be under obligation to observe such rites, or 
even that the original command will be preserved 
and communicated to them in the sacred writings. 
Neither of these can be considered as indispensable, 
because sufficient evidence of a Divine institution 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 171 

may be afforded in some other way." (Dr. Woods 
on Infant Baptism, p. 17.) 

Now, if circumcision was not abolished by sub- 
stitution, by what authority was it ever abolished ? 
and by whom was it done ? It will not answer to 
say, that circumcision terminated with the Jewish 
dispensation, like the institutions of Moses, without 
any repealing act; for even the ceremonial law of 
Moses did not terminate without introducing its 
substitute in the Gospel institutions, and that, too, 
by Divine authority. And circumcision, as we have 
before proven, was not an institution of Moses, only 
as he copied it from the Abrahamic covenant. And 
that covenant was not only itself everlasting, but 
requires an everlasting token, making circumcision 
that token, without fixing its duration. Either, 
therefore, circumcision terminated in Christian bap- 
tism, or it continues to this day, binding upon all 
of Abraham's spiritual seed. 

That circumcision was discontinued we fully be- 
lieve, because the apostles did not administer it but 
in a few cases, evidently to conciliate the prejudices 
of the Jews — see Acts xvi, 3; and in the fifteenth 
chapter of Acts they discard the use of it through- 
out all the Churches, especially in the case of con- 
verted Gentiles. Nor did they claim to act in this 
matter upon their own authority, any more than in 
releasing them from "keeping the law of Moses." 
The conduct of the apostles throughout indicates 
some previous authority by Christ, thus to treat the 
subject. But when and where was it given, unless 



172 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

by substituting baptism in the stead of circum- 
cision ? 

But still it may be said, the apostles did not re- 
gard baptism as a substitute for circumcision, be- 
cause, on the day of Pentecost, and subsequently, 
they administered baptism to those who had been 
previously circumcised. This was virtually a repe- 
tition of the same ordinance, if both are of the 
same import. To this we reply : 

1. These Jews had been previously excluded from 
the Church by the authority of Jesus Christ — see 
Matt, xxi, 43 — " Therefore say I unto you, The king- 
dom of God shall be taken from you, and be given 
to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." And 
while thus excluded, the rite of initiation was 
changed. See Matt, xxviii, 19. Now, as these 
Jews desired to return to the Church of God, they 
must not only give evidence of repentance and 
faith, but receive the new rite of initiation, the old 
one being dead. The apostles, and others that had 
not been excluded from the Church, were not re- 
quired to receive the new token; at least, there is 
no account of their ever being baptized. 

2. It was the more important that these repenting 
and returning Jews should be baptized, because, by 
so doing they would not only acknowledge his Mes- 
siahship, but also his right as the God of Abraham 
to change the form of the covenant token — a very 
important point to be gained with Jewish converts. 
Hence all pedobaptist Churches, adopting the prac- 
tice, and following the example of the apostles, 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 173 

invariably baptize Jews when converted to Christ, 
and ask admission into his Church. The Jews were 
a hard people to convert, and, after conversion, were 
unwilling at once to renounce their old-established 
usages. They were very tenacious of circumcision, 
and quite reluctant to exchange it for baptism as 
the ordinance by which their membership was here- 
after to be acknowledged. Hence, when the apos- 
tles baptized Jews, they simply baptized them "in 
the name of the Lord Jesus." As Dr. Lightfoot 
says, "The apostles baptized the Gentiles according 
to the precept of our Lord, in the name of the Father , 
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Matt, xxviii, 
19. For since it was very much controverted among 
the Jews about the true Messias, it was not without 
cause, yea, nor without necessity, that they bap- 
tized in the name of Jesus; that by that seal might 
be confirmed this most principal truth of the Gos- 
pel ) and that those that were baptized might profess 
it — that Jesus of Nazareth was the true Messiah. 
But among the Gentiles the controversy was not 
concerning the true Messias, but concerning the 
true God. Among them, therefore, it was needful 
that baptism should be conferred in the name of 
the true God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." 

We have thus, I think, given a good and suffi- 
cient reason why the apostles administered Christian 
baptism to Jews as well as Gentiles on and after the 
day of Pentecost, and in perfect agreement, too, 
with the doctrine here advocated — that circumcision 
as a tolcen of the covenant terminated in Christian 



174 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

baptism, by the authority of Jesus Christ. "We 
have already stated that the form of the initiating 
ordinance was temporary. It was adapted to a non- 
proselytic form of religion, such as was that of the 
Jews, but not to the Gospel plan. But the purpose 
of G-od in regard to admitting members into the 
Church by some ceremony remained unaltered. 
The order of the Church, in this respect, is per- 
petual. The great Lawgiver never intended to 
abolish the practice of admitting members to the 
Church, or annexing them to the covenant — which 
is the same thing — by an external sign or ceremony 
of some sort. When circumcision was established 
it fixed the form of the ordinance for the time; 
when it was abolished it left the order of the Church, 
which was in this respect settled and perpetual, un- 
altered; it still remained that an external mark or 
sign of Some kind must be put upon all the children 
of the covenant. And we say that the design of 
God, in reference to admitting members into his 
Church by some external ceremony, is not tempo- 
rary, but perpetual. It can no more pass away than 
the Church itself can fail; it involves a principle 
that not merely affects the external character of the 
Church, but strikes at its very existence. . . . And 
after the abolishment of circumcision it must be 
evident that, in whatever form the initiatory ordi- 
nance was to be continued, the essential order and 
settled constitution of the Church, in this respect, 
would remain unchanged. The dress, only, of the 
ordinance was changed/ 7 (Hibbard on Infant Bap- 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 175 

tism, pp. 76 ; 77.) In the apostolic commission the 
formula of the rite of initiation was changed so as 
to make it signify more fully than before the rela- 
tion in which the subject was placed to God: 
" Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and 
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." By a careful 
examination of the Greek text it will be perceived 
that our translators have not fully given the mean- 
ing of the original formula. As it now. stands it 
must mean that the administrator is to baptize "in 
the name/' that is, by the authority of the Holy Trin- 
ity, which is true enough so far as it goes. But the 
expression in the original — s^ *6 ovopa — should be 
rendered into or unto the name of the " Father, 
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;" which 
implies not only that it is done by Divine authority, 
but that the subject is brought into a new relation 
to the Divine Trinity, and unto the enjoyment of 
new rights and blessings in consequence of that 
relation. The Church of Christ is denominated 
Christ's body. (See 1 Cor. x, 17; Eph. iv, 16; 
Col. i, 18.) Hence, being initiated into the Church 
by baptism is called being baptized "into Christ." 
"For ye are all the children of God by faith in 
Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been 
baptized into Christ have put on Christ." To "put 
on Christ" is to take upon us the profession of 
Christianity, as the ancient proselyte took upon him 
the profession of the religion of Moses, by receiving 
the rite of circumcision; and being "baptized into 
Christ' ' can but mean a visible connection with his 



176 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

mystical hody, the Clmrcli ; and this is done by re- 
ceiving Christian baptism. On the "day of Pen- 
tecost/' it is said that "they that gladly received 
his word were baptized : and the same day there 
were added unto them about three thousand souls." 
Acts ii, 41. Baptism here stands practically in its 
true place, as the ordinance of initiation to Church 
privileges; for the company of believers to which 
they were added, by baptism, then constituted the 
Church. Again it is said — Acts ii, 47 — "And the 
Lord added to the Church daily such as should be 
saved." 



SECTION V. 

CHRISTIAN BAPTISM, LIKE CIRCUMCISION", IS A " TOKEN" OF A COV- 
ENANT RELATION WITH GOD, A SIGN OF INWARD PURITY, 
AND A SEAL OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF FAITH. 

We do not claini, nor shall we attempt to prove, 
that baptism is described in the New Testament by 
all, or even any, of the above names. This is not 
necessary. The true characteristics of the institu- 
tion is what we are seeking; and other circumstan- 
ces beside names will aid us in making this dis- 
covery. 

L Christian baptism is a "token" of a covenant 
relation with God. 

The Scriptures already quoted to prove that bap- 
tism succeeds circumcision as the rite of initiation, 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPT1S3I. 177 

also prove it to be a token of a covenant relation; 
for all who become members of God's Church are 
also in a covenant relation to the divine Head of 
that Church. The Church in both the Old and 
New Testaments is described as having entered in- 
dividually into a marriage covenant, so as to render 
her collectively the Lord's wife, or the Lamb's 
bride. And the rite by which individuals are rec- 
ognized as members of the Church, must at the 
same time betoken the above covenant relation. 
" Baptizing them into the name of the Father, and 
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," therefore 
means not only being inducted into the mystical 
body of the Holy Trinity, but also being placed in 
a solemn covenant relation to the Triune God; and 
being " baptized into Christ " implied to the con- 
verted Jew both an induction into Christ's mystical 
body, and a solemn covenant relation to Christ. 
St. Paul says, "If ye be Christ's, then are ye Abra- 
ham's seed." Gal. iii, 29. And Abraham's seed 
were all required to receive the token of the cove- 
nant in their flesh forever ; and since the abolition 
of circumcision, baptism is the only remaining in- 
stitution which betokens at the same time a con- 
nection with "Abraham's seed/' and a consecration 
to Abraham's God. 

II. Christian baptism is an outward sign, in the 
flesh, of inward purity of heart. 

1. Water, being cleansing and refreshing in its 
nature, is used in both Testaments as an emblem of 
the divine Spirit by which the believing soul is 
12 



178 INEANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

purified and refreshed. Ezekiel xxxvi, 25-27: 
"Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye 
shall be clean ; from all your filthiness and from all 
your idols will I cleanse you .... And I will put 
my Spirit within you/' etc. Isaiah xliv, 3 : "I will 
pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon 
the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, 
and my blessing upon thine offspring/' Psalm li, 
2, 7: "Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and 
cleanse me from my sin . . . Purge me with hyssop 
and I shall be clean ; wash me, and I shall be 
whiter than snow." John iii, 5: "Except a man 
be born of water and of the Spirit, he can not enter 
into the kingdom of God." 1 Cor. vi, 11: "But 
ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are jus- 
tified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the 
Spirit of our God." Titus iii, 5 : "By the washing 
of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." 
In several of the above instances "washing" with 
"water" is first introduced as the figure, and after- 
ward the Spirit is spoken of as the real cleansing 
agent. 

2. This ceremonial use of water is to be seen in 
the typical baptism of John. "The baptism of 
John was a visible token of reformation on the part 
of the recipient. But in addition to this, it was 
also manifestly typical of the dispensation of the 
Holy Ghost, which was ushered in with so much 
power on the day of Pentecost. Hence, when John 
baptized with water, he exhorted the people to look 
forward through the shadowy medium of that out- 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 179 

ward ordinance to the more important baptism of 
the Holy Ghost. i I indeed baptize you with water, 
but he [Christ] shall baptize you with the Holy 
Ghost/ Acts i, 5. 'For John truly baptized with 
water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost 
not many days hence/ " (Hibbard on Baptism, 
p. 118.) 

The object of the Savior in referring his disciples 
to declarations of John, as above quoted, was to 
revive the expectation which John's typical ordi- 
nance had created in reference to the baptism of 
the Holy Ghost. And so strongly was the connec- 
tion of the two fixed in the mind of Peter, that 
when he saw the Holy Ghost descend upon the con- 
gregation assembled in the house of Cornelius, he 
said, "Then remembered I the word of the Lord, 
how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; 
but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost." 
Acts xi, 16; also x, 44. Now, why, we would ask, 
is the baptism of John and the baptism of the 
Holy Ghost so constantly connected together, unless 
the former is a type of the latter? 

3. When Christian baptism was instituted by the 
Lord Jesus, it was designed to be the standing type 
through all subsequent ages of the inward washing 
performed by the Holy Ghost upon the heart. And 
here let me add, that before the coming of Christ 
all typical ordinances looked into the future for 
their antitype. But after Christ came all typical 
ordinances look to something that has already oc- 
curred as their antitype. And "all those that possess 



180 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

the substance should also receive the outward sign; 
for it is in this way they evince to the world its pos- 
session. We have seen many pious persons who, 
possessing the substance, decline receiving the type, 
supposing that with a regenerate heart they can not 
be lost. This light estimation of baptism is partly 
owing to the unreasonable and unscriptural stress 
that is laid upon it. But Christians should learn, 
that "what God hath joined together, let no man 
put asunder f nor can it be fully determined now 
how far the neglect of a known positive duty may 
ultimately militate against the salvation of the soul 
once regenerated. 

The relation which baptism sustains to regenera- 
tion is very properly described by the Church of 
England, as follows: 

" Ques. How many parts are there in a sacrament? 

"Ans. Two. The outward visible sign, and the 
inward spiritual grace. 

a Q. What is the outward visible sign, or form in 
baptism ? 

"A. Water, wherein a person is baptized, in the 
name of the Father , oind of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghost. 

"Q. What is the inward spiritual grace? 

"A. A death unto sin, and a new birth unto 
righteousness; for being by nature born in sin, and 
the children of wrath, we are hereby made the chil- 
dren of grace. " 

1. The first instance in which this relation be- 
tween the outward ordinance and the inward grace 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 181 

is described, after Christian baptism was instituted, 
is Acts ii, 38: " Repent and be baptized every one 
of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remis- 
sion of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the 
Holy Ghost." The signification of this passage 
depends upon the meaning attached to the word si$, 
for. Mr. A. Campbell says, "Peter, to whom was 
committed the keys, opened the kingdom of heaven 
in this manner, and made repentance, or reforma- 
tion, and immersion equally necessary to forgive- 
ness. ... I am bold, therefore, to affirm, that 
every one of them who, in the belief of what the 
apostle spoke, was immersed, did, in the very instant 
in ivhich he was put under the water, receive the for- 
giveness of his sins, and the gift of the Holy Ghost." 
(Christian Baptist, pp. 416, 417.) 

(1.) Mr. Campbell evidently regards baptism "for 
the remission of sins," in the light of a positive 
condition of forgiveness, infallibly and universally 
accompanied with the remission of sins and the gift 
of the Holy Ghost. But how does this agree with 
facts recorded in the eighth chapter of Acts ? Philip^ 
a newly and regularly-ordained evangelist, went down 
to "Samaria," and there preached the Gospel to 
multitudes. And in the twelfth verse we are in- 
formed that "when they believed Philip preaching 
the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the 
name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both 
men and women." Now, these persons "believed 
Philip," and then were baptized. But in the four- 
teenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth verses we are told, 



182 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

that ''when the apostles which were at Jerusalem 
heard that Samaria had received the word of God, 
they sent unto them Peter and John: who, when 
they were come down, prayed for them, that they 
might receive the Holy Ghost : for as yet he was 
fallen upon none of them : only they were baptized 
in the name of the Lord Jesus." How long it was 
between their baptism by Philip and the reception 
of the Holy Ghost in answer to the prayers of Peter 
and John, we are not informed; but evidently long 
enough to show the entire falsity of Mr. Campbell's 
declaration. Even " Simon believed" and "was 
baptized;" and yet Peter declares in the twenty- 
third verse that he was "in the gall of bitterness, 
and in the bond of iniquity." It may be said that 
remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Ghost 
were not necessarily connected, and, therefore, the 
former may have been received without the latter. 
But if remission is given without the agency of the 
Holy Ghost, through what particular agency was it 
given 1 Certainly not through the sole agency of 
^ater. Mr. Campbell himself would not dare say 
so ; for then might the Holy Ghost be entirely dis- 
pensed with in saving men from sin, and water 
alone relied upon. 

(2.) Mr. Campbell makes "remission of sins" 
and the "gift of the Holy Ghost" dependent upon 
the previous reception of baptism, as though the 
former could not be possessed without the previous 
reception of the latter. But how does this agree 
with facts recorded in Acts, tenth chapter ? In the 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 183 

forty- fourth verse it is said, that " while Peter yet 
spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them 
which heard the word." Referring to this same 
circumstance subsequently, Peter says that the Lord 
"put no difference between us and them, purifying 
their hearts by faith." Acts xv, 9. And after the 
Holy Ghost had thus fallen on all of them, " puri- 
fying their hearts by faith," Peter says, "Can any 
man forbid water, that these should not be bap- 
tized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well 
as we?" Acts x, 47. Baptism, in this instance, 
was not administered till after the "purification of 
their hearts by the Holy Ghost, through faith." 

(3.) Facts show, in opposition to Mr. Campbell's 
whole theory, that even on the day of Pentecost, 
the remission of sins and the reception of the Holy 
Ghost preceded baptism by water. Acts ii, 41, we 
read, "Then they that gladly received his word 
were baptized" — acfpsvus, gladly, means joyfully, 
readily, or willingly ; indicating a state of mind 
which no unforgiven sinner can possess. Peter's 
practice, then, must explain his words. But can 
an explanation be given to the language of Peter 
which will place the remission of sins and the gift 
of the Holy Ghost antecedent to baptism? 

(4.) We have said that the meaning of this pas- 
sage depended entirely upon the sense attached to 
the word s*£ for. This word is translated in the 
New Testament in at least a dozen different ways; 
translators usually depending upon the connection 
in which it stood for the meaning to be attached; 



184 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

but most frequently, in connection with baptism, it 
is translated to, unto, in, into, or in relation to. A 
word thus variable in signification, is rather a dan- 
gerous foundation on which to risk the salvation of 
millions in time and eternity. John the Baptist 
says — Matthew iii, 11 — "I indeed baptize you with 
water, [a**,] unto repentance. " Now, John's bap- 
tism, according to his own description, stood in the 
same relation to repentance that Christ's baptism 
stands in to remission, as described by Peter; the 
same word, s^, being employed in both places. But 
who ever thought of John's baptism being admin- 
istered to make men penitent, or as a condition "for 
repentance Y 9 No; John required those coming to 
his baptism first to " bring forth fruits meet for 
repentance." Nor did Peter contemplate placing 
baptism as an infallible condition of remission and 
of the reception of the Holy Ghost John baptized — 
£t$ — in Jordan; and both Philip and the eunuch 
went down — £i$ — into the water. Suppose we trans- 
late £i$, in these places, for instead of in and into, 
where would' be Mr. Campbell's strongest argument 
for immersion? If St. Peter's language was trans- 
lated £ i$, unto, or in relation to remission, his meaning 
would have heen. plain and his doctrine evangelical. 
Dr. Clarke translates the sentence, "for the re- 
mission of sins/' Etj a^scrco apaptLuv — in reference to 
the remission or removal of sins. " Baptism," he 
adds, " pointing out the purifying influence of the 
Holy Ghost; and it is in reference to that purifica- 
tion that it is administered, and should, in consid- 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 185 

eration, never be separated from it; it only points 
out the grace by which this is to be done." As an 
outward sign it typifies the inward pardon and 
purity effected by the Holy Ghost : hence, the peo- 
ple, on the day of Pentecost, who heard Peter, and 
who' " gladly , or joyfully received his word," by re- 
penting, believing, and receiving its promised bless- 
ings, "were baptized" unto, or in reference to remis- 
sion and the gift of the Holy Ghost. 

2. The second place in which baptism is clearly 
spoken of as a figure or sign of inward holiness, is 
Acts xxii, 16 : " And now why tarriest thou ? Arise 
and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on 
the name of the Lord." 

Mr. Campbell says, "Now, the washing away of 
his sins was certainly to be accomplished through 
the water of baptism." (Debate between Campbell 
and Rice, p. 439.) 

Mr. Campbell must have forgotten a rule which 
he has made for the exposition of such passages as 
the above. " The active participle, in connection with 
an imperative, either declares the manner in which 
the imperative shall be obeyed, or explains the mean- 
ing of the command." (Christian System, p. 198.) 
There are three things imperatively commanded in 
the above passage : 1. " Arise;" 2. " Be baptized;" 
3. "Wash, away thy sins:" there is but one active 
participle — " calling on the name of the Lord" — ap- 
plicable, however, only to the third imperative — 
"declaring the manner in which it shall be obeyed;" 
"wash away thy sins; calling on the name of the 



186 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Lord." According to Mr. Campbell's own rule, 
sins were to be " washed away," not by " the water 
of baptism/' but by " calling on the name of the 
Lord." The only relation, therefore, that baptism 
can have to the " washing away of sins/' is a figura- 
tive relation, as was the case with circumcision — 
Deut. x, 16 — " Circumcise therefore the foreskin 
of your heart, and be no more stiff-necked." Nor 
does the mention of baptism first require that it 
should be first received. 

3. The third instance is found in 1 Peter iii, 20, 
21 : " Wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved by 
water. The like figure whereunto, even baptism, 
doth also now save us, (not the putting away of the 
filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good con- 
science toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus 
Christ." 

(1.) St. Peter speaks of a salvation which Noah 
and his family experienced, not by the ark, but 
"by water/' but from what were they "saved by 
water?" — not saved from personal sin, for he was 
already righteous. They were not saved in heaven, 
for they were yet on earth. Nor yet were they 
saved from hell; the righteous are not in danger of 
going there. Nor did the water save them from 
death by drowning, for the ark saved them from 
this. Still, the question is unanswered, From what 
was Noah and his family "saved by water?" The 
only answer which can be given to this inquiry is, 
that they were "saved by water" from the filthy 
conversation and corrupting example of the wicked, 






CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 187 

being separated from them by the waters of the 
flood, a figure of salvation in heaven. 

(2.) Baptism is called a "like figure" and "now 
saves us." "The like figure whereunto, even bap- 
tism, doth also now save us;" "not the putting 
away the filth of the flesh." Nor is baptism able 
to save us from death, or hell, or sin ; or to save us 
in heaven. In like manner as water saved Noah 
and family in the ark, baptism now saves us from 
the corrupting example of the wicked, by inducting 
us into Christ's Church, and obligating us to re- 
nounce the world, the flesh, and the devil; and this it 
does as a "figure" — a figure of that salvation which 
secures heaven when the wicked are all destroyed. 
Baptism answers to salvation as figure does to sub- 
stance, as soul to impression, as type to letter, or as 
the face in the glass represents the face out of the 
glass; or, as the apostle describes it, "Let us draw 
near with true hearts, in full assurance of faith, 
having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, 
and our bodies washed with pure water." In this 
way it "answers," or betokens "a good conscience 
toward God." 

4. Before we close this section, we must intro- 
duce St. Paul once more. Col. ii, 11, he says, " In 
whom also ye are circumcised with the circum- 
cision made without hands, in putting off the body 
of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of 
Christ." Circumcision of Christ! What circum- 
cision did Christ possess or institute ? It could not 
have been the circumcision of the Abrahamic cove- 



188 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

nant; that was here called the " circumcision of 
Christ; for it was made with hands in the flesh." 
What other circumcision, then, did Christ institute ? 
It may he said that the apostle only referred to 
circumcision here figuratively, to describe spiritual 
regeneration, which is made " without hands, in the 
heart, and not in the flesh." True, circumcision 
then was a figure of regeneration; but what circum- 
cision does the apostle here refer to as a figure of 
regeneration, which he so positively denominates 
the circumcision of Christ? The Abrahamic cir- 
cumcision, even as a figure, does not answer the 
description given. Let the apostle explain himself. 
He says, in the next verse, "Buried with him in 
baptism," etc. "Baptism," then, is "Christ's cir- 
cumcision." True, baptism is spoken of also figu- 
ratively ; but as a figure of regeneration, it is de- 
nominated the "circumcision of Christ," or the 
circumcision Christ instituted. How certain it is, 
then, that St. Paul understood Christian baptism to 
be instituted by Christ as a " figure of regeneration" 
in lieu of circumcision, which formerly occupied 
that same position ! What other reason can be of- 
fered for denominating baptism "the circumcision 
of Christ?" We have proven, I think, to the satis- 
faction of the candid reader, that baptism has taken 
the place of circumcision, not only as the rite of in- 
itiation, and as a covenant token, but also as an out- 
ward sign in the flesh of inward holiness. 

5. This same use of baptism is probably made by 
St. Paul to the Romans — vi, 3, 4 — "Know ye not 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 189 

that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus 
Christ, were baptized into bis death? Therefore 
we are buried with him by baptism into death : that 
like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the 
glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in 
newness of life/' The term "buried" has often 
been interpreted to signify immersed, and this im- 
mersion is a type of the death and resurrection of 
Christ, and is, therefore, often referred to as settling 
the mode in which baptism is administered. The 
words of the apostle must either have a literal, spir- 
itual, or figurative signification, and we must first 
determine which before we can quote him in proof 
of any doctrine. If the apostle spoke of a literal 
burial, either in Jordan by baptism, or in the grave 
at death, then these Roman Christians must have 
been in Jordan or the grave "with Christ." It 
does not read, buried like him, or as he was buried, 
but "with him." This, I think, is a little more 
than literal interpreters of the Scripture will dare 
to claim. The context, from the first to the eleventh 
verses, clearly shows that the apostle was speaking 
of a spiritual death unto sin, a spiritual burial, a 
spiritual resurrection, and a spiritual life. To be 
dead unto sin implies sin's destruction ; to be 
"buried with Christ" implies the most perfect in- 
itiation into all the merits of Christ's death; to be 
u raised in his likeness" implies an entirely-renewed 
and elevated spiritual character; to live with him 
implies the constant life of faith in Christ. These 
facts being settled, it is left positively certain that 



190 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

the apostle referred to a spiritual baptism, not as a 
type of Christ's death and resurrection, but as the 
grand agent by which all those believers were inter- 
ested in Christ. If any allusion is here made to 
water baptism it is figurative of the baptism of the 
Holy Ghost. 

III. Baptism succeeds circumcision as a seal of 
the righteousness of faith, testifying to the fact 
that the bearer, being made righteous, is an heir of 
eternal salvation. Markxvi ; 16: a He that believ- 
eth and is baptized shall be saved." Through faith 
we are made righteous and retained in a righteous 
state. Baptism is the Divine seal or approving wit- 
ness of this character; and such shall be saved. 
Circumcision was a sign and a seal of the righteous- 
ness of the faith Abraham had before he was cir- 
cumcised. Take the following illustration: The 
king is informed that one of his subjects, who had 
been condemned to die for his sin, had also become 
penitent, and furnishes reliable evidence of a thor- 
ough reformation, and had applied to his majesty 
for a pardon. The pardon is graciously granted, 
written with his own hand; but to give assurance 
to the public that the instrument is authentic, he 
orders the application of his own seal, used only for 
such purposes. During the old dispensation this 
holy seal was circumcision. But has the King of 
heaven a seal for the new dispensation? If so, it 
must be baptism. Nothing else is found in the 
New Testament bearing that character; and as St. 
Mark, in describing the apostles' commission, places 



CIRCUMCISION AND BAPTISM. 191 

baptism in precisely the relation to the righteousness 
of faith that circumcision before occupied, espe- 
cially in the case of Abraham; and as baptism is 
called by the apostle Paul the " circumcision of 
Christ," we have no hesitancy in giving baptism 
this peculiar character, notwithstanding it is no 
where called a seal. But it may be said that 
neither circumcision nor baptism could be to in- 
fants a seal of the righteousness" of faith, because 
infants are incapable of faith. True; but infants 
are not incapable of the righteousness of faith, or 
which the adult receives by faith ; for when adults 
repent, believe, and are converted, they become "as 
little children " — Matt, xviii, 3 — and, as the Savior 
said in reference to " little children," "of such is 
the kingdom of heaven." Their character must, 
without either repentance or faith, be righteous, not 
by nature, but by the gracious atonement : hence, 
being capable of the righteousness of faith, they 
are also deserving the seal. 



f**i flfjfij:*. 



THE SPIRITUAL COVENANT MADE WITH ABRAHAM, CON- 
TAINING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CHURCH OF GOD, PERMA- 
NENTLY SECURES TO THE INFANT CHILDREN OF BELIEVING 
PARENTS THE RIGHT TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHURCH, 
AND TO A COVENANT RELATION WITH GOD, TOGETHER WITH 
RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION AND WATCH-CARE, AND TO HAVE 
THESE RELATIONS ACKNOWLEDGED AND RATIFIED BY THE 
COVENANT TOKEN. 



SECTION I. 

THE MORAL CHARACTER OF LITTLE CHILDREN CONSIDERED. 

Haying ; in other parts of this work, examined 
the spiritual and permanent character of the Abra- 
hamic covenant, and of the Church of God founded 
upon it, with the religious ordinance which it con- 
tained, we now intend to examine the permanent 
provision which it makes for its infant membership; 
and especially, in this place, the moral character 
which, in consequence of its provisions, all infants 
sustain. 

I. The covenant secures to the infant world a Re- 
deemer, through whose vicarious death alone they 
are justified and saved from original guilt and its 
punishment. 

The promise reads — Gen. xii, 3 — "And in thee 
shall all families of the earth be blessed." Again — 
13 193 



194 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

G-en. xxii, 18 — "And in thy seed shall all nations 
of the earth be blessed." 

St. Paul says — Gal. iii, 16 — that this ""Seed" 
promised^ "is Christ." Through Christ, therefore, 
all nations and families of the earth were to be 
blessed. In what sense they are all blessed through 
Christ, will appear in Romans v, 18, 19: "There- 
fore, as by the offense of one, judgment came upon 
all men to condemnation, even so by the righteous- 
ness of one the free gift came upon all men unto 
justification of life. For as by one man's disobe- 
dience many were made sinners, so by the obedience 
of one shall many be made righteous." 

This elliptic sentence means, simply, that, as by 
the sin of Adam himself and posterity were right- 
eously condemned to death, which would have cut 
off the whole human race in embryo, so, by the 
death of Jesus Christ in their stead, all men are 
redeemed and restored to life; so that all men are 
now born in a justified state, here called "justifica- 
tion of life." 

This arrangement was barely intimated to our first 
parents, soon after they had sinned, in these words — 
G-en. iii, 15 — "And I will put enmity between thee 
and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; 
it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his 
heel." A very obscure promise, indeed, that Christ, 
the seed of the woman, should, by his death, de- 
stroy the effect of Adam's sin upon his posterity, 
sufficiently, at least, to give them a temporal exist- 
ence commenced in innocency. 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 195 

This fact, thus dimly asserted, was embodied in 
the covenant made with Abraham, as one of its per- 
manent provisions. Hence, in the fulfillment of 
that covenant, the infant world have a Redeemer, 
and are justified and saved. 

II. Through the same covenant provisions, infants 
are made fit for Christ's kingdom on earth and in 
heaven. 

He says — Matt, xix, 14 — " Suffer little children, 
and forbid them not, to come unto me ; for of such is 
the kingdom of heaven. " Or, as Dr. Clarke renders 
it, "The kingdom of heaven is composed of such." 
A similar declaration is found in Matthew — xviii, 2, 
3 — "And Jesus called a little child unto him, and 
set him in the midst of them, and said, Verily I say 
unto you, except ye be converted, and become as lit- 
tle children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of 
heaven." 

The term, " kingdom of heaven," in both of the 
above instances, must refer either to Christ's spirit- 
ual kingdom on earth, or his kingdom in heaven, or 
to them both, as one. If the first be his meaning, 
then are little children fit for membership in Christ's 
Church. But if the second be his meaning, then, 
as no subject is fit for heaven, who is not first made 
by his grace fit for his kingdom or Church on earth, 
then still are little children fit subjects for the 
Christian Church. And if the third is the sense in 
which he is to be understood, then, also, are little 
children fit subjects for Christ's Church on earth or 
in heaven; so that the moral qualifications for mem- 



196 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

bership in the Church of Jesus Christ is fully de- 
clared, by the founder of the Church himself, to ex- 
ist in little children. 

Nor is this fitness enjoyed by one class of infants 
alone, but by all little children, without an excep- 
tion; for the term rtcnSta — children — has nothing to 
limit it to any class of children. We do not claim 
for infants a state of holiness in the highest sense, 
either natural or evangelical. But we do claim, in 
their behalf, a state of evangelical innocence, or 
justification, such as adults must be made to enjoy 
by being converted, or pardoned, through the me- 
dium of faith in Christ, by which they are made 
subjects of Divine grace and of the kingdom of 
heaven — a state which will insure salvation in case 
of death. 

And it is for the purpose of retaining them in 
this justified state, that they are placed within the 
embrace of the Church, and in a covenant relation to 
God; at once securing to them a religious educa- 
tion, ministerial and Christian watch-care, with the 
special blessing of a covenant-keeping God. 

Now, if there was so much advantage every way 
to the infant children of the Israelites, under the 
old dispensation, to be placed in covenant with God, 
why may it not also be of as much advantage to the 
infant children of Christians to be placed in the 
same covenant relation to God, by the application 
of the token in its new and improved form, under 
the new dispensation ? 

III. Infants are capable of being obliged relig- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 19? 

iously by a covenant entered into by their parents 
in their behalf. 

This certainly is true in temporal things. When 
the parent enters into a contract concerning the 
homestead, he binds and obliges not only himself, 
but his heirs, etc., who are compelled in law to 
abide the contract, or endure its penalty, if they 
fail to conform to the obligations entered into in 
their behalf by the father. Nor does the parent 
trespass upon the rights of his children in so doing. 
Nor yet is the law an unjust or oppressive law for 
giving him this power, or in obliging the children 
to the contract of the father; for the law is right- 
eously founded in the very nature of the relation 
existing between the parent and the child. Now, 
why can not the parent bind and oblige his chil- 
dren religiously, without invading their rights? 
Does he not sustain precisely the same relation to 
them in religious that he does in temporal things ? 
Is not the parent as much in duty bound to furnish 
his children with a pious example, religious instruc- 
tion, Christian watch-care and government, as he is 
to furnish them food, raiment, and a parental home ? 
And are they not as much dependent upon him for 
the former as for the latter? Why, then, does not 
the natural relation between the parent and the child 
empower the former to bind and oblige the latter in 
religious as well as in temporal things? 

Now, we claim it as an indisputable position, that 
while the law of man authorizes the parent to bind 
and oblige his children in temporal things, the law 



198 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

of God authorizes him to do the same in religious 
things; and the one law is as just, and as much 
founded in the natural relation existing between 
theni, as the other. 

How perfectly unreasonable and unbecoming the 
Christian, are those complaints which we often hear 
made by professed believers in Christ, because their 
parents obligated them to a godly life in their 
infancy ! We have already quoted the language of 
the covenant to show that it permanently conferred 
the above right upon believing parents. We will 
now show that this same right was subsequently 
recognized and renewed. Deut. xxix, 10-13: a Ye 
stand this day all of you before the Lord your God ; 
your captains of your tribes, your elders and your 
officers, with all the men of Israel, your little ones, 
your wives, and thy stranger that is in thy camp, 
from the hewer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy 
water; that thou shouldst enter into covenant with 
the Lord thy God, and into his oath, which the 
Lord thy God maketh with thee this day; that he 
may establish thee to-day for a people unto himself, 
and that he may be unto thee a God, as he hath 
said unto thee, and as he hath sworn unto thy fa- 
thers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob." 

This is but a renewing of the former covenant 
made with the patriarchs; and yet how careful the 
Lord is to embrace their little ones as obligated in 
the covenant with their parents ! 

The same principle is acknowledged by Christ in 
its fullest extent — Matt, xix, 13 — " Then were there 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 199 

brought unto him little children, that he should put 
his hands on them and pray." 

I suppose that it was the parents of these chil- 
dren that brought them to Christ; and that their 
object in bringing them was, that they might con- 
secrate them to God. For laying on of hands, and 
prayer, was a most solemn mode of consecration to 
God among the Jews, the pesstn, or object, being 
ever afterward regarded sacredly as the property of 
God. 

St. Luke — xviii, 15 — calls them fa j3p«^ — very 
young children; perhaps less than eight days old, 
which probably was the reason why the " disciples 
rebuked them" that brought them, supposing them 
to be too young to be thus solemnly and publicly 
consecrated to God. Christ, to be sure, did not ap- 
ply any water to them, for the very good reason that 
he had not .yet constituted baptism with water the 
token of his covenant. Jesus did " suffer" the little 
children to "come unto him;" he did "take them 
into his arms," and "laid his hands on them," and 
"blessed them," and consecrated them to God, as 
solemnly as infants were ever consecrated to him in 
baptism. The application of water could not have 
made the consecration any the more perfect, nor the 
withholding of it, under the circumstances, did not 
render it any the less effectual. 

Infants, then, are not only fit for and entitled to 
membership in the Church of God, but they are 
capable of being bound and obligated to God by the 
act of their parents. 



200 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

IV. Infants are capable of receiving good, as the 
result of this covenant relation to God, in which 
they are placed by their parents. 

This is certainly true in temporal things. An 
infant may be crowned king in his cradle ; and the 
kingdom may be as much his, and ultimately of as 
much value to him, as though the crown was with- 
held till he could appreciate its value. An infant 
may be freed from slavery in its mother's arms, and 
that freedom prove as rich a boon as though it had 
been withheld for years. An infant may receive 
the deed of an estate worth millions before he is 
competent to know from what beneficent source it 
came. 

And it is quite as certain that infants are capable 
of, and do actually enjoy, the spiritual blessings 
promised in the Abrahamic covenant. 

1. That covenant secures to the world a Redeemer. 
And it is from the death of that Redeemer, without 
their knowledge, or act, or desert, that the infant 
world receive their justification. 

And can it be possible that infants are capable of 
receiving redemption, justification, and life eternal, 
through Christ, as provided for in the constitution 
of the Church of God, and yet are not competent 
to be visibly connected with that Church, nor to 
receive the sign which she, in her constitution, pro- 
vides, outwardly to signify and seal the very thing 
they possess? Preposterous in the extreme! The 
sign and the thing signified, in our opinion, ought 
never to be separated. And as infants are capable 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 201 

of receiving redemption, justification, and heaven, 
they are certainly competent to receive the sign 
that betokens, and the seal which evidences the 
above state. 

2. That covenant secures God himself, in all his 
power and rich grace, to children. It reads, "I 
will be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." 
As this "seed" constitutes the Church, God, there- 
fore, promises by covenant to give himself to his 
Church. And that Church being composed, in 
part, of infants, God promises himself to infants as 
well as to adult members of his Church. 

And in promising himself to the Church, he 
promises, through Christ, to become their redeemer; 
and through the Holy Ghost to become their sanc- 
tifier, comforter, preserver, and whatever else they 
may need of grace to fit them either to die or to 
live. And inasmuch as infants as well as adults 
need all the above spiritual influences, as they grow 
up to maturity, to preserve them from error, tempta- 
tion, and sin, they certainly can be benefited by, 
and should be placed in, a covenant relation to God, 
where all the above gracious influences are perma- 
nently secured to them. It is impossible to tell how 
far the Lord can operate upon, either the heart of 
an adult Christian, or upon the heart of a child, 
either to preserve them from sin, or to reclaim them 
after falling into sin, without interfering with the 
freedom of the will, or impairing the agency of 
the creature, or destroying the conditionality of sal- 
vation. But it is certain that so far as he can do 



202 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

so ; without infringing upon the above immovable 
points, or fixed principles, in the system of grace, 
the Lord God of heaven and earth stands solemnly 
bound in covenant to enlighten, seek after, and 
incline them to the reception and retention of the 
grace of life eternal. And although it is proper 
and right that children, dying in infancy, should 
sustain this relation to a covenant-keeping Grod, yet 
we deem it infinitely more important that those that 
live and grow up to manhood, surrounded, as they 
constantly are, with innumerable temptations to 
evil, should enjoy all the benefits growing out of 
that relation to them. Nor will it answer to say 
that the Lord, being impartial, will employ the same 
means, and to the same extent, to save others, that 
he does to save those in covenant with him. For 
this assertion is not only without proof, but is in 
direct opposition to both Scripture testimony and to 
the whole history of mankind; for Grod promised 
himself to Abraham and to his seed in a sense and 
to an extent in which he never promised to be the 
God of the heathen world with which they were 
surrounded. And the whole history of the Israel- 
ites goes to prove that Grod was with his covenant 
people in a sense and to an extent he was with no 
other cotemporary nation or people. And he em- 
ployed, in their behalf, means of grace more numer- 
ous, and to a much greater extent, than was em- 
ployed any where else upon earth. And hence St. 
Paul truly says, in answer to the inquiry, "What 
advantage, then, hath a Jew ? or what profit is there 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 203 

in circumcision ?" " Much, every way." "Chiefly," 
to be sure, " because that unto them were committed 
the oracles of God" — the holy Scriptures, in which 
the Lord revealed himself, and communicated the 
blessings of his grace and of his salvation to Abra- 
ham's seed according to the covenant. We do not 
say that none were saved in heathen countries, but 
such as were brought into covenant with God by 
circumcision. Unquestionably there have been 
many pious heathens saved who knew but little of 
the plan of salvation, and that were never in cov- 
enant with God according to its outward form. But 
yet their chance for salvation was comparatively 
small, and the number saved comparatively few. 

Nor do we claim that all who were placed in this 
covenant relation to God in their infancy were 
finally saved; for there were always conditions, con- 
nected with the salvation of adults, with which the 
mercy of God could not interfere, and, conse- 
quently, by an obstinate refusal to perform those 
conditions, on the part of those once in covenant 
with God, their salvation would be forfeited, not- 
withstanding that relation. 

But as St. Paul says, "What if some did not be- 
lieve ? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God 
without effect ? God forbid." Notwithstanding all 
that has happened to some of those in covenant 
with God, yet more have been saved who stood in 
this relation, in consequence of the powerful means 
employed for that purpose, than have been saved 
among those that stood not in this relation, and, 



204 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

consequent! y, enjoyed none of the means of grace 
which it secures. The fact is indisputable, that 
there was a much greater number of the Israelitish 
nation saved in heaven, between Abraham and 
Christ, in proportion to their whole number, than 
in any other nation cotemporary with them, and not 
in covenant with God. Why, then, may it not con- 
tinue to be so with those families and nations who 
consecrate their children to God in infancy? So 
in reference to the children of Christian parents, 
though some do not believe; yet this should not 
destroy the confidence of others in their covenant- 
keeping God, so as to withhold their children from 
his covenant token. 



SECTION II. 

THE INFANT CHILDREN OF BELIEVING PARENTS HAVE THE RIGHT 

PERMANENTLY SECURED TO THEM OF MEMBERSHIP IN 

THE CHURCH OF GOD BY THE RECEPTION 

OF ITS INDUCTING ORDINANCE. 

That part of the Abrahamic covenant which 
secures to infant children membership in the Church 
of God by the reception of the inducting ordinance 
of the covenant, is found in Genesis xvii, 12-14 : 
u And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised 
among you, every man-child in your generations, he 
that is born in the house, or bought with money of 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 205 

any stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is 
born in thy house, and he that is bought with 
money, must needs be circumcised; and my cov- 
enant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting cov- 
enant. And the uncircumcised man-child, whose 
flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul 
shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken 
my covenant." 

Accordingly it is said — Genesis xvii, 23 — "And 
Abraham took Ishmael, his son, and all that were 
born in his house, and all that were bought with 
his money, every male among the men of Abraham's 
house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin, 
in the self same day, as God had said unto him." 
Here we have not only the covenant with its provi- 
sions in behalf of children, but also the organization 
of the Church under those provisions, embracing 
children with their believing parents. And the ex- 
ample of the patriarch was faithfully followed by 
all his descendants till Christ came, and was cir- 
cumcised. 

In Part Second of this work we have proven that 
from the time of the giving of the law of Moses 
down to the ascension of Jesus Christ, baptism was 
administered in connection with circumcision to 
Gentile proselytes upon their reception to Church 
privileges. We will now prove that their infant 
children were received with them by the same proc- 
ess — just as the children of the Israelites were 
baptized, with their parents, "unto Moses in the 
cloud and in the sea." 



206 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Dr. Lightfoot says, "They baptized also young 
children — for the most part with their parents. 
Tliey baptize a little proselyte according to the judg- 
ment of the Sanhedrim ; that is, as the gloss ren- 
ders it, If he be deprived of his father, and his 
mother bring him to be made a proselyte, they baptize 
him — because none becomes a proselyte without cir- 
cumcision and baptism — according to the judgment, 
or rite of the Sanhedrim ; that is, that three men be 
present at the baptism, who are now instead of a 
father to him. And the Gemara, a little after, says, 
if with a proselyte, his son and his daughters are 
made proselytes also, that which is done by their 
father redounds to their good." " R. Joseph saith, 
When they grow into years, they may retract : where 
the gloss writes thus, this is to be understood of 
little children, who are made proselytes with their 
father. (Bab. Cherub., fol. 11.") 

u If an Israelite take a Gentile child, or find a 
Gentile infant, and baptize him in the name of a 
proselyte, behold he is a proselyte. (Maim, in Ava. 
dim. c. 8.") 

"H. Hezekiah saith, Behold a man finds an infant 
cast out, and he baptizeth him in the name of a 
servant; in the name of a freeman do you also 
circumcise him in the name of a freeman. Heiros 
Jevam., fol. 8." (See Dr. Clarke's comments at the 
close of Mark.) 

From the above quotations it will be seen, 

1. That infant children, at eight days old, both 
of Jewish and Gentile parentage, were to be cir- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 207 

cumcised; and those of Gentile parentage were 
both circumcised and baptized. 

Now, having proven that circumcision to the lit- 
eral descendants of Abraham, and circumcision 
with baptism to the Gentiles, constituted the rite 
of initiation to the Church of Jesus Christy from its 
commencement down to the time of his ascension, 
the conclusion is inevitable, that infants were, from 
the beginning, constituted members of the Church of 
Jesus Christ, either by circumcision alone, or by 
circumcision and baptism together. 

2. It was only the children of believing parents, 
guardians, and masters, that were to be admitted in 
this way to membership in the Church. 

(1.) Abraham is personally addressed: "Thou 
shalt keep my covenant therefore; .... every man- 
child among you shall be circumcised. " Gen. xvii, 
9, 10. 

(2.) Abraham's seed were required to do the same : 
"Thou and thy seed after thee in their genera- 
tions." Gen. xvii, 9. "And I will establish my 
covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after 
thee in their generations." Gen. xvii, 7. "This 
is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and 
you, and thy seed after thee; every man-child 
among you shall be circumcised." Gen. xvii, 10. 

(3.) This seed embraced all believers in Christ, 
whether Jews or Gentiles: ''For the promise that 
he should be the heir of the world was not to Abra- 
ham or to his seed, through the law, but through 
the righteousness of faith." Rom. iv, 13. "That 



208 



INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 



lie might be the father of all thero. that believe. " 
Kom. iv, 11. "Know ye therefore that they which 
are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham." 
Gal. iii, 7. Abraham and his believing seed were 
to bring their children with them into the Church 
of God through all their generations. 

3. But why was the privilege confined to believ- 
ing parents of bringing their children with them 
into the Church of God? We answer, the differ- 
ence is wholly owing to the parents. And that dif- 
ference is felt not by those children of unbelieving 
parents who die in infancy, but by such us live to 
manhood. The reasons why they are not placed in 
the Church, and in a covenant relation with God, 
are, 

(1.) Because their parents do not sustain that 
relation, and, therefore, can not enter into a cove- 
nant with God in behalf of their children. Every 
covenant made must have two parties, each under- 
standing the part he has to act, and pledging him- 
self solemnly to perform his part in the covenant. 
The child is not competent to understand what the 
covenant enjoins; namely, to walk before God and 
be perfect. Therefore the parent, guardian, or mas- 
ter must act as the party in the covenant in behalf 
of the child, till the child becomes competent to 
understand and to act for itself; when, if the par- 
ent has done his duty as defined in the covenant, 
the responsibility is transferred to the child. 

(2.) The unbelieving parent, etc., is not compe- 
tent to perform the duty to the child which, as a 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 209 

party in the covenant, he engages to perform. For 
the parent not only represents the child as a party 
in the covenant, but he also engages to teach and 
govern "his children and his household after him/' 
so that (i they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do 
justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring 
upon Abraham [and upon all that do like him] 
that which he hath spoken of him" — in the cove- 
nant. For an unbelieving parent, or for " spon- 
sors," as is done in some Churches, to make 
engagements which they can not and will not even 
try to perform, is, in our judgment, a most solemn 
mockery, and ought not to be tolerated in the 
Church of Grod. Nor will it answer to say that 
many of the Jews who circumcised their children, 
did not understand the covenant engagements which 
they took upon themselves in this solemn spiritual 
light; nor did they try to bring up their children 
in this pious and godly manner. The fact is too 
plain, and its existence called forth too frequently 
the reproof and chastenings of the Almighty, to be 
denied. 

But the same may be said of thousands within 
the pale of the Church of Christ in our day. They 
have brought their children into the Church simply 
because their fathers have done so before them, 
and because their Church rules require it, and are 
as ignorant of its spiritual import, of the binding 
character of the pledges they have made, and are as 
neglectful of their performance as the Jews of the 
old dispensation ever were. Hence the reproach 
14 



210 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

with winch the Cliurcli lias been loaded; the dis- 
satisfaction of many of the children who have been 
placed in a covenant relation, with what their par- 
ents have done for them; and the hesitancy of 
many good Christians about the propriety of placing 
their children in that relation. 

There is, in our opinion, no subject in relation to 
which the Church needs to be enlightened more 
than upon this. 

4. Nor is it left optional with believing parents 
whether or not they will place their children in this 
covenant relation to God. 

The command is imperious: " Thou shall keep my 
covenant therefore," is the language of the Al- 
mighty to Abraham, and to all believers in their 
respective generations. And the command is as im- 
perious upon believing parents to place their children 
in this covenant relation to God, as it is to place 
themselves there. "He that is eight days old shall 
be circumcised;" "And my covenant shall be in 
your flesh for an everlasting covenant." Now, 
when, and where has God ever released believing 
parents from the performance of this duty? If he 
has never released them in terms as plain and une- 
quivocal as the language in which he enjoined the 
duty, then it must continue binding. And before 
any Christian parent should make up his mind to 
defer bringing his child to God, and placing it in 
the sacred covenant relation here secured to it, he 
should be able to show that God has not only 
changed the form of the token, but also that he 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 211 

has changed the covenant so as to authorize the 
delay. 

Persons may be ignorant in relation to their duty 
on this point, or they may listen to opposing views 
till they may not know what is their duty; and, un- 
der such circumstances, may not feel particularly 
condemned for the neglect or delay. But we firmly 
believe that well-informed Christians can no more 
neglect, or delay, placing their children in a cove- 
nant relation to God, without feeling remorse, than 
if they neglected, or delayed placing themselves 
there. 

Some persons will say, I know that it is my duty 
to consecrate my children to God, and this I have 
tried to do a thousand times in secret and family 
prayer. But would this answer the requisition of 
the law in your own case ? After being converted, 
and becoming like a little child, will it be sufficient 
that you have consecrated yourself a thousand times 
to God in secret, or at the family altar? Why not? 
Why, clearly because in addition to all this, God 
requires you publicly to connect yourself with his 
Church, and place yourself in a covenant relation to 
him, by receiving the token of the covenant in your 
flesh. And does he not require you to do the same 
thing to your children ? And is it not as wrong to 
violate the law in their case as in your own ? Why 
not? It is an old and true saying, that " whatever 
is done unconstitutionally is not done at all." Now, 
the constitution of the Church no where directly 
enjoins it upon you to consecrate either yourself or 



212 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

your child in secret or at the family altar. The 
law of Grod, to be sure, does. But the constitution 
stands above all law, and therefore has the highest 
claims; and till your children are brought and 
consecrated to God, according to his directions in 
the constitution of the Church, they are not conse- 
crated at all. Other consecrations are good in their 
place, but can never take the place or answer the 
purpose of the regular consecration enjoined in the 
covenant. 

5. Nor is the provision of the covenant respect- 
ing children a temporary arrangement, bounded by 
the Jewish dispensation. The temporal and typical 
blessings, promised in the covenant, were condi- 
tional, and have been exchanged for others better 
suited to the wants of the Church. And the token 
of the covenant, for reasons good and sufficient, has 
been changed in form, so as to be less painful and 
burdensome ; but the spiritual precept and promise 
of the covenant, and the token in the flesh in its new 
form, continues, and is to continue forever; for, 
u my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlast- 
ing covenant," gives to the everlasting covenant an 
everlasting token. 

We have elsewhere examined the import of ever- 
lasting, as used in this covenant, and have proven 
it to signify endless duration, even when applied to 
things temporal in themselves, because they shadow 
forth things which are eternal; and the word everlast- 
ing embraces both. But when applied to things spir- 
itual, that do not shadow forth any thing, either in 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 213 

heaven or in earth, then the primary meaning of 
the word must be attached, which is endless dura- 
tion in that form. Now, it can not be claimed that 
those provisions in the covenant, which relate to 
Abraham's spiritual seed, are typical, or shadow 
forth any thing in heaven or in earth : hence their 
perpetually-binding obligation. "I will establish 
my covenant," make it permanent, "between me 
and thee," God and Abraham, " and thy seed after 
thee in their generations," between all believers in 
Christ, in all their generations, and me their God, 
"for an everlasting covenant," running through 
both dispensations, through time and the endless 
cycles of eternity. u I will be a God unto thee and 
to thy seed after thee." And in their infancy is 
the time prescribed for entering into this covenant, 
and the believing parent is the responsible agent to 
act for and represent the child: hence, the ever- 
lasting covenant was designed to embrace all of the 
children of the Church of God through time and 
eternity; and if it does not, the Church or parents 
of the children are to blame. 



214 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 



SECTION III. 

THE SAVIOR OF THE WORLD DID NOT DISFRANCHISE CHILDREN OF 

THEIR RIGHT TO MEMBERSHIP IN HIS CHURCH, 

BUT ESTABLISHED IT. 

Haying established the right of infants to mem- 
bership in the Church of God, by the everlasting 
provisions of the covenant, or constitution of the 
Church ; and having proven, too, that this relation 
to the Church, on the part of infants, was to be per- 
manent, and was to be acknowledged by the applica- 
tion to them of the covenant token, which was, first, 
circumcision, and, second, baptism into the name of 
the Divine Trinity, it now belongs to our opponents 
to take the affirmative, and advance the proof that 
infants, by some alteration of the provisions of the 
covenant, have been disfranchised of their ancient 
rights. Inferences, or circumstantial evidences, will 
not answer in a case like this. Even positive law, 
could it be pointed out, must yield to the superior 
claims of a constitutional provision. An actual 
change, positively made, in the Abrahamic cove- 
nant, touching this point, must be clearly proven. 
If this can not be done, we adjure them to stop 
their unreasonable and unjustifiable crusade against 
infant baptism. 

When the constitution of a state or nation, in 
one of its articles, has positively defined what kind, 
or class, or classes of persons are to enjoy the privi- 
leges of citizenship, and by what particular process 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 215 

or ceremony this right shall be acknowledged or 
secured; the class of persons described, by conform- 
ing to the regulations prescribed, will be entitled to 
those rights as citizens so long as the state or nation 
continues to exist, and to act under the constitution 
unaltered. Nor has any town, city, county, or fac- 
tion of the people, or officer of the government, 
any right to deprive them of the rights guaranteed 
in the constitution; nor has the legislature any right 
to pass a law interfering with these rights. Nothing 
but an alteration of the constitution, or the adoption 
of a new one, can disfranchise them. Now, we 
defy anti-pedobaptists, who are making so much 
bluster about the baptism of infants, to show an 
alteration of the Abrahamic covenant so as to ex- 
clude infants from the reception of its token or any 
of its gracious spiritual provisions, or to prove the 
adoption of a new constitution containing a prohibi- 
tion of infants from its gracious and spiritual pro- 
visions. 

Now, we admit that the form of the inducting 
ceremony was changed at the commencement of 
the new dispensation; but that either believers in 
Christ, or their infant offspring, were, by any enact- 
ment of Jesus Christ, excluded from the Church, 
or deprived of the reception of the new inducting 
ceremony, we most positively deny; and those per- 
sons who exclude infants from the Church, and 
deny them Christian baptism, are in duty bound to 
prove that infants were thus disfranchised by Jesus 
Christ. Instead, therefore, of demanding of us a 



216 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

positive " thus saith the Lord" for infant baptism, 
they must show a positive "thus saith the Lord" 
against it. 

Dr. Lightfoot, speaking upon this very point, re- 
marks as follows: "To the objection, it is not com- 
manded to baptize infants, therefore they are not 
to be baptized; I answer, it is not forbidden to bap- 
tize infants, therefore they are to be baptized. And 
the reason is plain; for when pedobaptism in the 
Jewish Church was so known, usual, and frequent 
in the admission of proselytes, that nothing almost 
was more known, usual, and frequent, there was 
no need to strengthen it with any precept, when 
baptism was now passed into an evangelical sacra- 
ment. For Christ took baptism into his hands and 
into evangelical use as he found it; this added that 
he might promote it to a more worthy end and a 
larger use. The whole nation knew well enough 
that little children used to be baptized; there was 
no need for a precept for that which had ever, by 
common use, prevailed." (See more on this subject, 
in Clarke's Commentary, at the end of Mark.) 

This point has been illustrated by the following 
homely, yet appropriate similitude : 

" A man orders his servants to mark the sheep of 
his flock with a bloody sign, and is careful to add, 
' See that you apply this sign to all the lambs also/ 
Afterward he sees fit to dispense with the bloody 
sign, made with a knife in the flesh, and ordains 
that his servants shall mark his sheep with painty 
but he says nothing about the lambs. Now, the 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 217 

question is, will these servants, because the marking 
is a 'positive institution/ argue that the lambs are 
no longer to be marked because they are not speci- 
fied, in so many words, in the second order? As 
they purchase more sheep with lambs, will they 
mark the sheep, but say they have no order for 
marking the lambs? Every man must see that the 
case would be just the contrary. All the natural 
force of circumstances would tend to establish the 
conviction that no change was intended in the 
mark further than its external character. Its appli- 
cability to the lambs, as well as to the sheep, would 
not be considered as being at all affected by such a 
change in the mark or sign. And it is wholly un- 
natural to suppose that they would reason from 
such a fact to the exclusion of the lambs. So in 
the case before us. The fact of the external form 
of the initiating ceremony, or mark of discipleship, 
being changed, is not a sufficient ground for infer- 
ring the change of the applicability of that ordi- 
nance to infants; and it is wholly unnatural and 
forced to suppose the apostles would have drawn 
such an inference. " (See Hall on Baptism, pp. 
156, 157.) 

To those who continue to demand a positive com- 
mand in the New Testament for the baptism of in- 
fants, we recommend the following from the pen of 
Eev. F. G. Hibbard : 

"That God has no where directly authorized 
female communion by any express precept; and as, 
from the reasonableness of the case, we are fully 



218 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

convinced it is the Divine will that thej should be 
admitted to the communion table, therefore we are 
warranted in believing that positive duties are some- 
times left to the direction of inference and analogy 
without explicit written command; and if such a 
subject as the right of females to the communion- 
table has been left to inference, analogy, and the 
reasonableness of things, so also may the subject 
of infant baptism — a subject, we repeat it, no more 
likely than the former to be misunderstood. And 
all this may serve to show how futile are the claims 
which some persons put forth to that highest kind 
of moral evidence, explicit command, as a condition 
of their faith. This point is so clear and evident, 
and so obviously parallel to the case of infant bap- 
tism, that it needs not to be amplified. '■' (Hibbard 
on Baptism, p. 82.) 

The same author again says : 

"The fact of the change of the Sabbath from the 
seventh to the first day of the week, rests upon the 
same kind of evidence as that which we claim for 
the support of infant baptism. It seems not to 
have been duly considered by our opponents, that 
from the earliest records of history God has deliv- 
ered his commands to men through various means,* 
and in somewhat varied kinds of evidence. If we 
attentively examine into the grounds of evidence 
that we have for various beliefs, we shall find that 
while for some we have the warrant of a Divine 
positive precept or declaration, for others we have 
only the authority of historical testimony and 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 219 

inductive reasoning. And these remarks, too, apply 
not merely to forms and accidental usages, but to 
cardinal and important subjects. We make these 
remarks, not to intimate a suspicion that fhere is 
any want of evidence in any part of revelation, but 
to direct attention to the fact that all duties are 
not sustained by the same kind of evidence/' 
(Hibbard on Baptism, pp. 83, 84.) 

" Is it not wholly unaccountable that the Baptists 
should reject infant baptism on the ground of a 
want of express precept, and then turn directly 
about, and advocate the first day of the week as the 
true Sabbath? They are forced to defend their 
practice in the observance of the first day of the 
week as the Sabbath day, on exactly similar grounds 
of evidence to those from which we argue the obli- 
gation and validity of infant baptism. Why do 
they accept this sort of evidence in the one case, 
and reject it, nay, hoot at it, in the other? The 
Seventh-day Baptists alone are herein consistent 
with themselves, and must necessarily possess great 
advantage of their brethren who keep the first day 
of the week, in argument on their respective pecul- 
iarities. 'They must either keep the seventh day/ 
says a Seven-day Baptist, <or reject the principles 
on which they reject infant baptism; they must 
give up their argument, or keep the seventh day, or 
else determine to act inconsistently and absurdly/ " 
(Eev. E. Hall on Baptism, p. 124.) 

"But the New Testament is not silent on the 
subject of infant baptism, but makes just such 



220 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

mention of it as, in view of the state of opinion at 
that tinie, proves it to have been enjoined and uni- 
versally practiced. It makes just such mention of 
the subject as the circumstances of the case re- 
quired. It is not the ordinance of baptism itself 
that we now speak of, but it is the application of 
this ordinance to infants. 

"The institution of Christian baptism required 
and received an express sanction from the lips of our 
Savior, and this command is registered. But the 
application of this rite to infants is a point that be- 
comes so obvious to the mind of the Jew, and to all 
who were conversant with the ancient usage of the 
Church, as to require no direct precept, or, at least, 
that the precept should be recorded. The light of 
analogy, and the force of ancient habit, precluded 
any such necessity. They had only need of being 
informed what was the initiatory rite of the new 
dispensation, and the fact of its applicability to 
infants would follow as a matter of course, unless 
prohibited; or, at most, would require only private 
direction. Under these circumstances, what men- 
tion may we suppose the New Testament would nat- 
urally make of this subject? We answer, it is 
reasonable to suppose that it would merely recognize 
facts and principles in relation to it, in an inci- 
dental way, without any intimation of their being 
new, or controverted, or doubted. And this we find 
to be the fact in the case. 

"The New Testament makes just such allusion to 
infants — recognizes all those facts and principles in 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 221 

reference to them — as supposes them still to retain 
their ancient rights to the seal of the covenant; and 
their ancient relation to the Church. Infants are 
spoken of in a manner wholly inexplicable on any 
other supposition than that of their eligibility to 
baptism, and in a manner to clearly indicate that 
there was no controversy on this point in the New 
Testament times. The reader will readily perceive, 
therefore, on a little reflection, the proper distinct- 
ive character of our position. He will be at no loss 
to appreciate the distinction between a positive com- 
mand, directing a certain line of conduct, and a 
recognition of principles and facts which imply such 
conduct, between an ordinance newly issued under 
sanction of positive authority, and an ordinance of 
ancient date, newly recognized in its principles, and 
in the fact of its existence." (Hibbard on Bap- 
tism, pp. 88, 89.) 

Fully indorsing the sentiments of Mr. Hibbard, 
we will here take the liberty to illustrate some of 
them. 

1. He says, " The New Testament makes just such 
allusion to infants — recognizes all those facts and 
principles in reference to them — as supposes them 
still to retain their ancient rights to the seal of the 
covenant, and their ancient relation to the Church." 
The following is an example: "Then were there 
brought unto him little children, that he should put 
his hands on them, and pray; and the disciples re- 
buked them. But Jesus said, Suffer little children, 
and forbid them not, to come unto me, for of such is 



222 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

the kingdom of heaven. And he laid his hands 
on them and departed thence." Matt, xix, 13-15. 

The following facts are worthy of special consid- 
eration. 

(1.) The persons who brought these " little chil- 
dren" to Christ ; were Jewish parents, themselves 
connected with the Church of God in infancy, and 
cherishing the highest veneration for all the provi- 
sions of the Abrahamic covenant, which secured to 
children a visible as well as a spiritual connection 
with the Church of God, and consecration to him 
by the application of the covenant token. They had 
learned, through John the Baptist, and others, that 
Jesus was the long-looked-for Messiah promised in 
the covenant, and they partially believed it. Their 
principal concern at this time was, to know what 
disposition the Messiah would make of their " little 
children" under the new dispensation. Hence, 
they brought them to Christ, and asked him to lay 
his " hands upon them, and pray." "It was a com- 
mon custom among the Jews," says Dr. Clarke, "to 
lay their hands on the heads of those whom they 
blessed, or for whom they prayed. This seems to 
have been done by way of dedication or consecra- 
tion to God — the person being considered as the 
sacred property of God ever after." Their object 
in bringing these children to Christ, and asking 
him to "put his hands on their heads, and pray," 
was to settle an important principle; and that prin- 
ciple related not so much to the ordinance as to the 
fact of consecrating little children to God. They 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 223 

knew not that any change in the ordinance of con- 
secration was contemplated: nor did they care or 
inquire about this; their minds grasped an object 
infinitely more important — it was, whether "little 
children" were to continue to enjoy a consecration 
to God, a covenant relation to him and his Church, 
or not, under the reign of the Gospel. 

(2.) "The disciples rebuked them/' supposing, 
as many parents now do, that these "little children" 
were too young to be benefited by the consecration 
and prayer of the Savior. St. Luke — xviii, 15 — 
calls them to, ppsyii — infants, or very young chil- 
dren. 

(3.) "But Jesus," knowing better than they did 
the object for which the children were brought, and 
fully approving of that object, and wishing to cor- 
rect the error and hasty action of his disciples, 
" said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to 
come unto me." He refers to "little children" 
generally, as well as to these in particular. He set- 
tles a principle for all time to come, that "little 
children" are to be brought to Christ, and conse- 
crated to God, and then assigns the reason, "for of 
such is the kingdom of heaven." 

(4.) "The kingdom of heaven," in this place, 
must refer either to his spiritual, invisible Church 
on earth during the dispensation of the Gospel, or 
his glorious spiritual reign in heaven, or he means 
both, as two departments of one kingdom. In 
either case the "kingdom of heaven" is composed 
of characters morally resembling those of "little 



224 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

children." And it is because they sustain this 
character, and stand thus related to the divine 
kingdom, that they were visibly and publicly to be 
consecrated to God. And this is precisely the char- 
acter the Jews had always given to " little children/' 
and this character was what constituted them 
" Abraham's seed/' and was the reason that they 
were connected with adult believers in the Abra- 
hamic covenant. The exact relation, therefore, 
which little children had sustained from the begin- 
ning to God and his Church, they are forever to 
continue to sustain. And this agrees perfectly with 
the declaration made by the prophet Jeremiah — 
xxx, 20 — " Their children [under the dispensation 
of the Gospel] also shall be as aforetime/' as they 
had been from the organization of the Church. 
Christian baptism was not yet instituted ; hence, the 
Savior did not baptize them, but he settles import- 
ant principles which others were to act upon, when 
baptism was instituted. This passage must be con- 
nected with the one containing the apostle's com- 
mission, for the mutual understanding of each; 
the first declaring what the relation of " little chil- 
dren" is to be to God and his Church forever, and 
the other showing how, under the new dispen- 
sation, this twofold relation is henceforth to be 
visibly and publicly acknowledged by "baptizing 
them." 

2. Mr. Hibbard speaks of the difference "be- 
tween an ordinance newly issued under sanction of 
positive authority 7 and an ordinance of ancient date, 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 225 

newly recognized in its principles, and in the fact 
of its existence." 

The difference is seen in the following particulars : 

(1.) A new positive institution should not be 
carried into practice beyond the plain letter of the 
language in which it is described, or the manifest 
example of those who authorized it. " See thou do 
all things according to the pattern showed thee in 
the mount," is as true in its application to New Test- 
ament positive institutions, as it was to those insti- 
tuted by Moses. 

(2.) An old institution, newly modified and estab- 
lished, should be made to differ from its former 
character only so far as the language in which it is 
described, or the example of those making the 
change, will justify. 

The fact has been fully settled, I think, that 
Christian baptism was not a new positive institu- 
tion, but was an old institution newly modified; 
that from Moses to Christ it was an adjunct of cir- 
cumcision, and was then, in an improved form, made 
to succeed it. The question, then, pertinent to this 
subject is, in what did he change the former char- 
acter and design of baptism ? Did he so modify it 
as to exclude infants ? This point will be investi- 
gated in its proper place. We have seen, however, 
that in advance of any interference with baptism, 
Jesus Christ did re-establish every thing in relation 
to infants that they had previously enjoyed. And 
unless there is some positive prohibition, the infer- 
ences are most decidedly in our favor. 
15 



226 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 



SECTION IV, 

THE COMMISSION GIVEN BY CHRIST TO HIS APOSTLES DOES NOT 

PROHIBIT, BUT PROVIDES FOR THE MEMBERSHIP 

AND BAPTISM OF INFANTS. 

We will examine that commission as given by 
Christ to his apostles and their successors in the 
ministry. 

I. As recorded by Matthew — xxviii, 19, 20. It 
reads, "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, 
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of 
the Son, and of the Holy G-host." 

1. The first thing to be ascertained is, whether 
the commission as here described presents any in- 
superable barrier to the baptism of infants. For, 
while anti-pedobaptists admit that the Savior did 
not expressly forbid the baptism of infants, he did, 
they say, lay down principles, and give directions, 
in reference to the ordinance of baptism, which, of 
necessity, excludes infants. 

(1.) They claim that Christ commanded the apos- 
tles to "teach all nations" and then to "baptize 
them." Consequently, teaching must, of necessity, 
in every case, precede baptism. 

(2.) Infants can not be taught before baptism; 
therefore infants should not be baptized. 

To this we remark, 

First. That the order of words in Scripture does 
not always point out precisely the order of things. 
St. Mark— i, 4— says, " John baptized in the wilder- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 227 

ness, and preached the baptism of repentance." 
But it can not be supposed that John invariably 
baptized first, and preached repentance afterward. 
Again — Mark i, 5 — "They were baptized of him 
in Jordan, confessing their sins." But were they 
baptized first, and then did they confess their sins 
afterward? The Lord's supper was instituted be- 
fore Christ's crucifixion, and baptism after it; but 
does the Church invariably administer the sacra- 
ment before baptism ? Again: if the language of 
the great commission is arbitrary as to time, then 
the apostles and their successors should not have 
baptized any till they had "taught all nations;" 
nor should they have taught any persons after bap- 
tizing them; for if the rule is arbitrary it must 
work both ways. It would be as unlawful to teach 
after baptism as to baptize before teaching them. 
But no such arbitrary rule was intended. 

Now, in all these cases the order of time is made 
to yield to the apparent relation and fitness of 
things. And this is all we ask in the case before 
us. All are to be taught, and all are to be bap- 
tized; and when teaching is necessary before bap- 
tism, let it be given; and where it is not necessary 
to constitute the candidate a fit subject for the ordi- 
nance, let baptism be administered first, teaching 
them afterward. Infants, as we have shown, are fit 
for the Church and for heaven, as well as for bap- 
tism, without teaching; therefore, let them be 
baptized first, and taught subsequently. 

Second. The word teach is not the best translation 



228 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

of the original that could be made. a Go ye, there- 
fore, and y,a0?i't6v6a't£ — matheteusate — make disciples 
or proselytes of all nations, baptizing them/' etc. 
"The translation we have given is, to say the least, 
as consistent with the original as the one in our 
common English version. This the Baptists them- 
selves will not deny. Beside, the specific duty of 
teaching is referred to in the- very next verse, and 
is expressed in another word. Our English pre- 
sents a perfect tautology: 'Go teach all nations, . . . 
teaching them/ etc. It will not be argued that 
this is either a smooth or forcible sense. The two 
words are not the same in the original, and cer- 
tainly can not be supposed, with any propriety, to 
bear exactly the same sense here. The first, which 
occurs in verse 19, enjoins upon the apostles to 
bring persons over to the Christian profession, 
which, in an adult, would imply some elementary 
teaching. But the second word, which occurs in 
verse 20, enjoins upon them to instruct these con- 
verts. The former word is more general, the latter 
more specific. Doddridge renders it, 'Go forth, 
therefore, and proselyte all the nations, . . . teach- 
ing them/ etc. This makes the same sense as the 
marginal reading, ( Qo make disciples or Christians 
of a-11 nations/ etc. Now, it is incontestible that 
they were commanded to (jLaO^Tfsv^aTfe — make disci- 
ples — before they were commanded to SiSaaxsw — 
teach. If not, why are these commands enjoined in 
this order? and if both these words mean the same 
thing in this place, why are the two employed, instead 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. * 229 

of one word, which would have been more simple? 
It is therefore absurd to suppose they mean the same 
thing. They were to perform the first command — to 
make disciples — before; they were to perform the 
second command — to teach, indoctrinate — after bap- 
tism. 

" Furthermore, the verb bears this sense else- 
where. Thus, Matt, xxvii, 57: i Joseph . . . who 
was efiaOrj-tsv^e — made a disciple of Jesus/ Acts 
xiv, 21 : ' And when they had preached the Gospel 
in that city — xao ^ad^'tEv^av'tB^ ixavov$ — and having 
made disciples of many/ That these persons of 
Derbe were not only taught, but actually discipled, 
and brought under the denomination of Christians, 
is evident, for in verse 22 they are called fiaO^tcav — 
disciples — and in verse 23 are spoken of as Church 
members. " (Hibbard on Baptism, pp. 95, 96.) 

If you would induce an adult to enter your school, 
you must first convince him that it is his interest to 
do so ; but children may be placed in the school by 
their parents; and in both cases you speak of them 
as scholars or disciples; and the children sustain 
that relation as really as do the adults. 

And inasmuch as infants without instruction sus- 
tain a moral character precisely similar to adults 
who have been taught and even converted — see 
Matt, xviii, 3 — they are therefore disciples by the 
action of their parents, in the fullest sense of the 
text, and are consequently as fit to receive baptism. 
The commission, therefore, in this instance, pre- 
sents no obstacle in the way of baptizing infants, by 



230 * INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

requiring them first to be discipled, or taken as sub- 
jects of instruction. 

2. The apostles would naturally understand the 
words of this commission as authorizing and direct- 
ing infant baptism. 

(1.) The word ixad^'tsvaa'ts — disciple — as used in 
the commission, signifies the same as proselyte among 
the Jews ; the former describing a convert to Christ, 
while the latter describes a convert to the law of 
Moses. 

"The word — ^afl^^ — matlietes, disciple, primarily 
signifies a scholar, that is, one who has placed him- 
self under the tutorage of another. A person who 
left his idolatry and heathen worship and came to 
Moses, adopting him as his authoritative teacher 
and guide in religion, was called a proselyte ; a per- 
son who 'forsook all/ and came to Christ, accept- 
ing him as his only religious teacher and guide, 
was called a disciple. The primary idea in both 
words is the same. Our Savior used the word dis- 
ciple, instead of proselyte, probably for no other 
reason than to avoid the confusion that would result 
from adopting a strictly Jewish vocabulary, although 
that vocabulary might otherwise have equally served 
his purpose." (Hibbard on Baptism, p. 97.) 

(2.) The practice of making proselytes to the Jew- 
ish religion was well understood by the apostles, 
who were commissioned to disciple or make prose- 
lytes of "all nations." Dr. Clarke says, "The term 
proselyte, from the Greek stpoa^vto^ — a stranger, or 
foreigner, one who is come from Ms own people or 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 231 

country to sojourn with another. All who were not 
descendants of some of the twelve sons of Jacob ; or 
of Ephraim, or Manasseh, the two sons of Joseph, 
were reputed strangers or proselytes among the Jews. 
But of these strangers or proselytes there were two 
kinds, called among them proselytes of the gate, and 
proselytes of justice or of the covenant. The former 
were such as wished to dwell among the Jews, but 
would not submit to he circumcised; they, however, 
acknowledged the true God, avoided all idolatry, 
and observed the seven precepts of Noah, but were 
not obliged to observe any of the Mosaic institu- 
tions. The latter submitted to be circumcised, 
obliged themselves to observe all the rites and cer- 
emonies of the law, and were in nothing different 
from the Jew but merely their once having been 
heathens. The former, or proselytes of the gate, 
might not eat the passover or partake of any of the 
sacred festivals ; but the latter, the proselytes of the 
covenant, had the same rights, spiritual and secular, 
as the Jews themselves." (See comments on Exo- 
odus xii, 43.) It is to this second class of proselytes 
we now refer; and it will be easy, I think, to con- 
vince the reader that the spirit of making prose- 
lytes was never higher among the Jews than when 
the Savior commissioned his apostles to make dis- 
ciples or proselytes of "all nations." Christ says — - 
Matt, xxiii, 15 — "Ye compass sea and land to make 
one proselyte." Josephus tell us — Ant. b. 13, c. 9, 
sec. 1 — that Idumea was wholly proselyted over as a 
nation. Again : wherever the apostles went, preach- 



232 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

ing the Gospel, they found Jewish proselytes. (See 
Acts ii, 10 ; vi, 5 ; and xiii, 43.) The apostles, there- 
fore, must have been familiar with this class of per- 
sons among the Jews as well as with the process by 
which they were made, themselves being Jews. 

(3.) These proselytes were baptized as well as cir- 
cumcised — a fact, too, with which the apostles 
must have been familiar. In addition to what has 
been said on this point — see Part II, Sec. I, and 
Sec. II — we will here give the testimony of a few 
more Jewish authorities : 

The Talmud of Babylon says, "When a proselyte 
is received, he must be circumcised; and when he is 
cured, they baptize him in the presence of two wise 
men, saying, Behold he is an Israelite in all things." 

The Talmud of Jerusalem agrees with the above, 
only, like Maimonides, it speaks of a " sacrifice" in 
addition to circumcision and baptism. 

The Gemara of Babylon, a Jewish commentary 
on the Mishna, says, "The proselytes entered not 
into covenant but by circumcision, baptism, and 
sprinkling of blood." 

And hence Arianus, who wrote about A. D. 147, 
calls the Jewish proselytes, in derision, "the bap- 
tized." (See Lightfoot's Horae Hebraiae Talmudicge; 
also, his Harmony of the New Testament. Dr. 
Hammond's Annotations; also, his Six Queries on 
Infant Baptism, quoted by Wall's History, Part I.) 

The following very appropriate remarks are from 
the pen of Dr. Woods. We commend them to those 
who deny that baptism was practiced by the Jews 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 238 

in making proselytes before it was instituted by our 
Savior. 

" First. The rabbins unanimously assert that the 
baptism of proselytes had been practiced by the 
Jews in all ages, from Moses down to the time when 
they wrote. Now, these writers must have been 
sensible that their cotemporaries, both Jews and 
Christians, knew whether such a practice had been 
prevalent or not. And had it been known that no 
such practice had existed, would not Jesus have 
been found bold enough to contradict such a ground- 
less assertion of the rabbins ? At least would there 
not have been some Christians, fired with the love 
of truth, jealous for the honor of the sacred rite, 
first instituted by Christ, who would have exposed 
to shame those who falsely asserted that a similar 
rite had existed for more than a thousand years ? 
But neither of these things was done. 

" Second. Had not the Jews been accustomed to 
baptize proselytes previously to the Christian era, 
it is extremely improbable that they would have 
adopted the practice afterward. For their contempt 
and hatred of Christianity exceeded all bounds, and 
must have kept them at the greatest possible dis- 
tance from copying a rite peculiar to Christians. 

"Third. It seems to have been perfectly consist- 
ent and proper for the Jews to baptize proselytes. 
For their divine ritual enjoined various purifications 
by washing, or baptism. And as they considered all 
Gentiles to be unclean, how could they do otherwise 
than understand the Divine law to require, that 



234 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

when any of them were proselyted to the Jewish 
religion, they should receive the same sign of puri- 
fication as was, in so many cases, applied to them- 
selves?" (Lectures on Infant Baptism, pp. 48, 49.) 

(4.) When Gentile parents were converted and 
made proselytes, their children — males under the age 
of twelve, and females under thirteen — were regarded 
as proselytes, and, accordingly, were baptized. 

"Boys under twelve years of age, and girls under 
thirteen, could not become proselytes till they had 
obtained the consent of their parents, or, in case of 
refusal, the concurrence of the officers of justice. 
Baptism, in respect to girls, had the same effect as 
circumcision in respect to boys. Each of them, by 
means of this, received, as it were, a new birth." 
(Robinson's Calmet, Art. Proselyte.) 

After the reader has again examined what has 
been said in another place on this subject — Part 
III, Sec. I — he will examine the following addi- 
tional testimony. Rab. Honna says, "They bap- 
tize an infant proselyte by the command of the 
bench. Upon what is this grounded? On this, 
that baptism becomes a privilege to him. And 
they may endow an absent person with a privilege; 
or they may bestow a privilege upon one, though he 
be ignorant of it." (See Lightfoot's Horse He- 
braise in Matt, iii, 28.) 

(5.) We will now briefly sum up what has been 
proven, as the grounds of our argument. We have 
proven that disciple, in the Christian vocabulary, is 
equivalent to proselyte with the Jews; and that 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 235 

proselyte was a name applied by the Jews to all con- 
verted Gentiles and their infant children; and that 
all such proselytes, whether adults or infants, were 
both circumcised and baptized; and that their 
mode of proselyting was extensively practiced by 
the Jews in the days of Christ and of his apostles; 
and knowing what customs did prevail, and what 
power early education and long-continued habit ex- 
ert upon the mind, Jesus said to his apostles, "Go 
and disciple" — make proselytes of "all nations/' and 
omitting to circumcise them as the custom had been, 
"baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of 
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," without the 
slightest intimation that infants, of converted par- 
ents, were not now, as formerly, to be regarded as 
proselytes, and, consequently, baptized. 

We will be greatly aided in arriving at the truth 
in relation to the above passages by the following 
rules. Mr. Horn says, "1. Ascertain the notion af- 
fixed to a word by the persons in general, by whom 
the language either is now or formerly was spoken, 
and especially in the particular connection in which 
such notion is affixed." He adds, "The meaning 
of a word used by any writer, is the meaning affixed 
to it by those for whom he immediately wrote. For 
there is a kind of natural compact between those 
who write and those who speak a language; by 
which they are mutually bound to use words in a 
certain sense : he, therefore, who uses such words 
in a different signification, in a manner violates that 
compact, and is in danger of leading men into error, 



236 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

contrary to the design of God." (Horn's Introduc- 
tion, p. 114.) 

Now, we have seen what notion the Jews of our 
Savior's day, and, consequently, the apostles, at- 
tached to making disciples, or proselytes. Their no- 
tion was, that infants were embraced; consequently, 
if Christ did not design infants to. be baptized, he 
was in duty bound to apprise them of the fact; and, 
therefore, by not excluding infants, he evidently 
designed them to be baptized with their parents, as 
was the custom. 

"It is common," says Mr. Wall, "for a rule or 
law to be so worded as that one may perceive that 
the lawgiver has supposed, or taken for granted, 
that the people to whom it was already given did 
already know some things which were previous to 
the apprehending of his meaning, so that it was 
needless to express them. But though these things 
were ordinarily known to the people of that time 
and place, yet we, who live at so great a distance 
of time, do not know them without an inquiry made 
into the history of the state of that time as to those 
things which the law speaks of, and, consequently, 
without such inquiry, the rule or law that was plain 
to them, will, in many particulars, be obscure to us. 
So, for example, many of the Grecian and Roman 
laws, whereof we have copies yet extant, would not 
be well understood by us unless they were explained 
to us by such as have skill in the history of the 
state of affairs in those empires. And so, many 
passages in the books of the New Testament of our 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 237 

Savior are not rightly apprehended without having 
recourse to the books of the Old Testament, and 
other books, wherein the customs of the Jewish 
nation are set forth, for understanding the state of 
religion among the people at that time when our 
Savior gave his rules. " (History of Infant Baptism, 
Introduction.) 

"It is a matter of no importance to the present 
argument, whether the Jews fairly derived their 
authority for baptizing proselytes from the Bible, 
or only from their doctors. The truth is, they had 
such a practice, and they quoted the Old Testament 
Scriptures as their authority. Whether, therefore, 
the practice were rightly or wrongly founded on 
the sacred Scriptures, they fully believed it to be of 
divine authority; and hence, it is easy to perceive 
that it would have the same influence over their 
minds, in determining the sense of their commis- 
sion, as though it had been indisputably of divine 
authority ; that is, without a prohibition, they would 
naturally have understood it as authorizing and 
directing them to baptize infants. The question is 
not, whether the baptism of Jewish proselytes — 
infants as well as adults — was right ? but whether 
the disciples, and all the Jews, believed it to be 
right? for the influence it would exert over their 
minds is not to be measured by the absolute fitness 
or obligation of the practice, but by their views of 
its fitness and obligation." (Hibbard on Baptism, 
pp. 103, 104.) 

Mr. Wall illustrates these views in the following 



238 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

way: " Suppose our Savior had ordered the apostles 
to require the nations to keep the Jewish feasts. 
If he had meant that they should not keep the 
i feast of the dedication ' — for which there is no 
positive Divine command — as well as the passover, 
and the rest which had been commanded in the 
law, he would doubtless, in that case, have excepted 
that. And there is the same reason in the case 
before us ;; — Wall's History, Part I, Introduction — 
to suppose that, if the Savior designed that the apos- 
tles should not baptize infants, they would have been 
excepted by him in the commission. 

We will here introduce one more quotation from 
Dr. Woods. He says, " Christ ordained that this 
rite, which had thus been used among the Israel- 
ites for purification, and thus applied to converted 
Gentiles, and to Jews who repented under the 
preaching of John, should, from that time, be 
applied to all, in every part of the world, who em- 
braced Christianity. The work of proselyting men 
to the true religion had before been carried on 
within narrow limits. It was now to be carried on 
extensively; and baptism, in the Christian form, 
was now to be administered to all proselytes. i Go 
ye and proselyte all nations, baptizing them in the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost/ In judging of the true meaning and 
intent of this commission, the apostles would natu- 
rally consider in what manner baptism had been 
administered, and particularly its having been ap- 
plied to proselytes and their children. This last cir- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 239 

cumstance, in addition to the other, with which 
they were so familiar, namely, that of having chil- 
dren, as well as parents, consecrated to God by cir- 
cumcision, must have had a direct and decisive 
influence upon the construction which the apostles 
put upon their commission, and must have left 
them to conclude that, under the Christian dispen- 
sation, children, as well as parents, were to be de- 
voted to God by baptism, unless some contrary 
instruction was given to prevent such a conclu- 
sion." (Woods's Lectures on Infant Baptism, pp. 
50, 51.) 

In addition to the above facts and arguments, the 
reader will remember that but a short time before 
this commission was given, the apostles were repri- 
manded for refusing to suffer little children to come 
to Christ, and the relation which little children had 
long sustained, both to the Church and to God, was 
in their presence reaffirmed by the Savior; conse- 
quently, as Knapp says, "If Christ, in his com- 
mand to baptize all — Matt, xxviii — had wished 
children to be excepted, he must have expressly 
said this; for since the first disciples of Christ, as 
native Jews, knew no other way than for children 
to be introduced into the Israelitish Church by cir- 
cumcision, it was natural that they should extend 
this to baptism — when baptism took the place of 
circumcision — if Christ did not expressly forbid it, 
especially after declaring them fit for the kingdom 
of heaven. Had he, therefore, wished that it 
should not be done, he would surely have said so 



240 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

in definite terms." (Woods's Lectures on Infant 
Baptism, p. 51.) 

3. The apostles could not fulfill the commission 
given them without baptizing infants. They were 
commanded to a disciple all nations, baptizing 
them/' etc. Mr. Campbell says, " The active par- 
ticiple, baptizing, in connection with an imperative, 
disciple them, either declares the manner in which 
the imperative is obeyed, or explains the meaning 
of the command." (Christian System, p. 198.) Con- 
sequently, according to his own showing, no person 
can be a disciple unless he is baptized; and as 
every nation is composed in part of infant chil- 
dren, no nation can be discipled till its infant 
children, as well as its adults, are baptized. Ac- 
cordingly, to " disciple all nations, baptizing them," 
etc., the apostles and their successors must con- 
tinue to "disciple" parents and children, " baptiz- 
ing them" till all the parents and children in "all 
nations" are "discipled" and "baptized." If it be 
said that they were commanded to " disciple all na- 
tions, baptizing them" only as they become adults, 
we answer this is adding to the commission a sen- 
tence and a thought which it does not contain, and 
which is no where authorized in either the New or 
Old Testament, nor in the practice of the Church 
in either dispensation, and therefore can not be 
regarded as being the true sense of the commission. 
Besides all that, a very large portion of every nation 
dies before arriving at adult years, and, conse- 
quently, if their baptism be deferred, a large por- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 241 

tion of every nation can never be "discipled, bap- 
tizing them/' etc., in this world. The apostles, 
therefore, received a commission which they conld 
not fulfill unless they baptized infants. From the 
facts we have proven, and the reasons we have ad- 
duced, we will leave the reader to judge whether 
the apostles would not, in view of all the circum- 
stances, be likely to understand the commission 
given them by their divine Master to authorize the 
baptism of infant children. 

II. We will examine the commission as recorded 
in Mark xvi, 15, 16: "Go ye into all the world, 
and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that 
believeth and is baptized, shall be saved; but he 
that believeth not, shall be damned." 

We would here remind the reader that infant 
Church membership, acknowledged by a visible 
Church ordinance, had been practiced from the be- 
ginning; and the question now is, whether the 
Savior, in the above language, prohibited its con- 
tinuance ? Anti-pedobaptists amrm, while we deny. 

Mr. Jewet says, " But the terms of the commis- 
sion, while they enjoin the baptism of believers, do 
most certainly exclude the baptism of any but believers. 
If I commission my agent to purchase for me a lot 
of Webster's large Dictionaries, does he not violate 
his instructions if he also buy on my account a lot 
of the abridgments? 'But/ he says, 'you did not 
forbid the purchase of the abridgment/ Did not 
forbid the purchase ! I answer, it was not neces- 
sary for me to insert in your commission a prohi- 
16 



242 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

bition against purchasing other books. Your in- 
structions were definite; and when I directed you 
to buy the large books, you must have known that 
you had no authority to buy small books; you have 
clone it at your own risk." (Jewet on Bap., p. 91.) 
But, conclusive as the above argument at first 
appears, a moment's investigation will show that 
the cases are not parallel. To make them parallel, 
we must suppose that Mr. Jewet' s agent had been 
long in his employ, and that others had preceded 
him in the same service; and that in all previous 
cases, when the employer was at all specific in his 
instructions, he had invariably commanded them to 
bring both the large and the small editions of Web- 
ster's Dictionary. And now Mr. Jewet informs his 
servant that he had greatly enlarged his storehouse, 
and he intended engaging in the trade of dictiona- 
ries much more extensively than ever before, and 
that he must bring him hereafter a much larger 
number of books than before, without specifying at 
all whether he wanted the large or small kind, or 
both. Would not the agent, under these circum- 
stances, look at the previous custom on this sub- 
ject, and get the same kind of books that agents 
had always previously gotten ? And if any of Mr. 
Jewet' s other agents should take it upon them- 
selves to complain, at his arrival, because he had 
brought some small books, would he not plead with 
propriety that if his employer intended to stop the 
trade in the small books, he should have told him 
so definitely? and that in the absence of such a 



EIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 243 

definite prohibition lie was justified in purchasing 
the small books ? Still, it may be argued that the 
term "believeth" does sufficiently define the sub- 
jects of baptism to amount to a prohibition of all 
that do not or can not believe. Says Mr. Jewet, 
" These directions command none but believers to 
be baptized." (Jewet on Baptism, p. 90.) But 
it is much easier to assert than to prove this propo- 
sition. 

We have before proven that the simple order of 
words by no means formed an arbitrary rule as- to 
the order of things. The word "believeth," being 
antecedent to " baptize," no more proves that faith 
must necessarily precede baptism, than does the 
word " teach" placed before " baptism," in Matt, 
xxviii, 19, prove that instruction, whether they 
need it or not, must precede baptism; or than " bap- 
tism" being placed before the "confessing of sins," 
in Matt, iii, 6, proves that baptism must, in all 
cases, necessarily precede confession; nor yet that 
"baptism" being spoken before "repentance," in 
Matt, iii, 11, renders it necessary that baptism 
should invariably precede repentance. If we un- 
dertake to make an arbitrary rule in one place, 
fixing the order and relation of things by the order 
of words, we may do so universally, and thus rule 
would conflict with rule till the Bible would present 
a worse confusion of rules than there was of 
"tongues" on the "tower of Babel." 

But it may be said that this is an exception, be- 
cause the Savior fixes faith as a necessary prerequi- 



244 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

site to baptism. Certainly no more than he does to 
salvation. "He that believeth and is baptized, shall 
be saved. " If faith is a necessary prerequisite to 
baptism, then both faith and baptism are necessary 
to salvation; and as infants can neither "believe" 
nor be "baptized/ 7 they certainly can not be "saved." 
This is a very hard argument for anti-pedobaptists 
to dispose of. Mr. Jewet attempts it in the fol- 
lowing rather ingenious manner: "With reference 
to Mark xvi, 16 — 'He that believeth and is baptized, 
shall be saved; and he that believeth not, shall be 
damned 7 — it is said, 'If we infer that a person must 
actually believe, else he can not be baptized, we 
must also infer that he must actually believe, else 
he can not be saved; hence infants can not be 
saved. 7 Certainly, if there were no way of saving 
infants but by the Gospel, this conclusion is inevi- 
table. The Gospel saves none but by faith. But 
the Gospel has nothing to do with infants, nor have 
Gospel ordinances any respect to them. The Gos- 
pel has to do with those who hear it. It is good 
news; but to infants it is no news at all. They 
know nothing of it. The salvation of the Gospel 
is as much confined to believers as the baptism of 
the Gospel is. None shall ever be saved by the 
Gospel who do not believe it; consequently, by the 
Gospel no infant can be saved. Infants are saved 
by the death of Christ, but not by the Gospel, not 
by faith. They are to be regenerated, but not by 
the Gospel; they are to be sanctified for heaven, 
but not through the truth revealed to man. The 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 245 

position is, therefore, good; none can be saved by 
the Gospel but such as believe the Gospel; none 
can be baptized with the baptism of the Gospel, but 
such as believe the Gospel. There is no exception 
in either case." (Jewet on Baptism, p. 93.) 

1. Mr. Jewet says, "None can be saved by the 
Gospel but such as believe the Gospel." V7hat is 
meant by being ^ saved by the Gospel," we do not 
fully understand. Can he mean that the Gospel has 
power to save independent of Christ, or of his 
death ? This can not be possible. He only meant, 
perhaps, that the Gospel saved instrumentally. The 
Gospel, which consists in the simple proclamation 
to men that have sinned that Christ has died for 
them, has no power in itself to save; but by excit- 
ing faith in Christ, through which he saves us, it 
becomes instrumental in our salvation. The death 
of Christ, therefore, is the efficient agent by which 
we are all regenerated, sanctified, and saved. And 
baptism, though a Gospel ordinance, is not a type, 
sign, or figure, either of the agent or of the instru- 
ment, but of the thing accomplished — of regener- 
ation and of sanctification. 

2. Mr. Jewet admits that infants are capable of 
receiving regeneration, sanctification, and salvation, 
though not through the instrumentality of the Gos- 
pel, but through the direct and efficient agency of 
the death of Christ. He says, "Infants are saved 
by the death of Christ, but not by the Gospel, not 
by faith." Again: "They are to be regenerated, 
but not by the Gospel ; they must be sanctified for 



246 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

heaven,, but not through the truth as revealed to 
man." But as baptism is not a sign of the Gospel, 
nor of truth, nor yet of the death of Christ, but of 
a regenerate heart, and of a sanctified spirit; and 
inasmuch as infants are capable of receiving, and 
do receive, the very thing signified by baptism, what 
difference does it make, whether it comes direct 
from the agent, or indirectly through one or more 
instrumentalities ? 

If a shepherd upon one of the mountains of Is- 
rael, having purchased a flock of sheep, some old 
and some young, and, being anxious that others 
should be able to designate them as well as himself, 
should send a servant with an instrument in his 
hand for the purpose, and should command him to 
mark them; but, before marked, his sheep must be 
washed with the water of a certain fountain him- 
self had prepared hard by the sheepfold; and that 
the mark should both indicate that they were his 
sheep, as well as signify that they had been washed. 
But the old sheep, having escaped from the fold, 
and having fled into the wilderness, must be searched 
after, and brought back, as well as washed. The 
searching, bringing back, and marking of the sheep, 
he assigns to his faithful servant, while he himself 
undertakes the washing, both of the young sheep 
at home and of the old ones as they return. Would 
the old sheep, when returned and washed, be any 
better qualified, or any more deserving of the mark, 
in consequence of the extra labor that had been 
instrumentally bestowed on them, than the young 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 247 

sheep, on whom no such instrumentalities had been 
employed, they, too, having been washed by the same 
hands, and in the same fountain ? The above illus- 
tration the reader will be able himself to apply. 

3. Mr. Jewet says, "None can be baptized with 
the baptism of the Gospel, but such as believe the 
Gospel." But why is this ? Has he not admitted 
that, without faith, infants possess all that baptism 
signifies? And if they can have the substance 
without faith, why not the figure ? But does he not 
know that what he here asserts is the very thing in 
dispute, which he should, at least, have tried to 
prove? Or did he think that his ingenious play 
upon words — that adults were u saved by the Gos- 
pel," and that infants were " regenerated by the 
death of Christ" — would turn the attention of the 
reader from the main point at issue, so that a bare 
assertion would be sufficient? It certainly looks 
like it. What connection is there between faith 
and baptism, which makes the one a necessary prere- 
quisite to the other? A direct and rational answer 
to this inquiry, would be worth more to the Bap- 
tist cause than a thousand ingenious shuffles. True, 
in the case of adults, faith is necessary as a condi- 
tion of regeneration; but in the case of infants, it 
is not necessary. They are regenerated without 
faith; and, consequently, as fit for baptism without 
faith, as adults are with it. Mr. Jewet knew bet- 
ter than to quote as Scripture what has often been 
quoted, "Believe and be baptized." He knew there 
was no such Scripture, 



248 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

4. But why does Mr. Jewet try to make tlie lan- 
guage of the Savior arbitrary in the first part of the 
passage, and not arbitrary in what remains? re- 
quiring faith as a universal prerequisite to baptism, 
so as to exclude infants from this ordinance, and yet 
not require both faith and baptism as necessary 
universal prerequisites to salvation, so as to exclude 
infants from it also ? If the first part of the pas- 
sage is arbitrary, the remainder must be doubly so. 
If infants can not be baptized because they can not 
believe, then, certainly, they can not be saved, for 
the double reason that they can neither believe nor 
be baptized; for "he that believeth and is baptized 
shall be saved." All we ask is fair play; and if 
the passage is arbitrary in the one case, let it also 
be in the other; and if our opponents fix a rule for 
others, let them stand by the same rule themselves. 
Mr. Jewet evidently feels this pinch of his own 
rule; hence he says, "If there were no way of sav- 
ing infants but by the Gospel, this conclusion is 
inevitable." "Infants," he says, "are saved by the 
death of Christ." Very true; but why not give us 
the same latitude of argument? When pedobap- 
tists refer to the "death of Christ" to show that 
infants are by it regenerated, and, consequently, fit 
for baptism without faith and without the G-ospel, 
anti-pedobaptists fly back to the above arbitrary 
rule, and attempt to tie us up by it, making faith 
indispensable to baptism. We admit that if there 
were no way of preparing them for baptism but by 
the Gospel and J)y faith, infants could not be bap- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 249 

tized; just as lie admits that "if there were no way 
of saving infants but by the Gospel, they could not 
be saved." But as he claims that infants are regen- 
erated and saved by the death of Christ, without 
the Gospel, and without faith, so we claim that 
infants are regenerated and fitted for baptism, by the 
death of Christ, without the Gospel, and without 
faith. It is said to be "a poor rule that will not 
work both ways." It is also a poor argument that 
will not give to an opponent grounds of argument 
which it claims for itself. All we want of our Bap- 
tist friends is the same latitude of argument which 
they claim for themselves. And if the commission 
as recorded by St. Mark is to be an arbitrary rule 
between faith and baptism, carry it out so between 
faith, baptism, and salvation; but if they can resort 
to other sources of argument to show that infants 
are saved, let us have access to the same source for 
evidence to prove that infants are prepared for 
baptism. 

5. But instead of faith being an arbitrary pre- 
requisite to baptism, the commission reverses it; 
and both in the original and in the English trans- 
lation, baptism is placed first in order, and should 
be first in practice. A careful analysis of the lan- 
guage employed, I think, will satisfy the impartial 
reader of this fact. The word pa7ttiaSs^, baptis- 
theis, is in the aorist passive form, and the sen- 
tence literally and properly means, " He that believ- 
eth, having been baptized, shall be saved." And 
this is the sense our English translation now gives. 



250 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

The verb "is," is a neuter verb, present tense. It 
describes not an action or passion received or en- 
dured in the present tinie, but a relation which the 
subject sustains at the time he believes — "he is 
baptized;" and to sustain a baptized relation at the 
time he believes, the subject must have been bap- 
tized previously; and if previously, it must have 
been done in infancy. If we connect "is baptized/' 
as most grammarians are inclined to do, we then 
have a passive verb, indicative mood, present tense; 
the subject "he" becoming a neuter nominative, 
and the verb retaining its neuter form, so that it 
still describes a state of being in which the subject 
exists at the time he believes. Or, if we call "is 
baptized" a perfect participle, it still describes a 
neutral relation, in which the subject exists, and 
the action that placed him there perfected at the 
time he believes. 

The sentence is so constructed in both the Greek 
version and the English translation of the Scrip- 
tures, as to give a decided preference to baptism 
before belief, and, consequently, to in/ant baptism. 
Still we do not believe that there is any thing in it 
that is arbitrary; and if a person has not been 
baptized before, he certainly should be baptized 
soon after he professes faith in Christ. So perfectly 
satisfied are we of the truth of what we are here 
advocating, that if we had to be baptized a thousand 
times, we would wish to be an infant every time. 
We have seen many a day, since we believed, in 
which, if required to be baptized, we would ever 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 251 

afterward have liad reason to doubt whether we 
were fit for the ordinance; but we can claim before 
Grod and man never seriously to have doubted the 
validity of our infant baptism ; since we gave the 
subject a careful investigation. 



SECTION V. 

HOW ST. PETER UNDERSTOOD AND PRACTICED THE APOSTLES' COMMIS- 
SION ON" THE DAY OE PENTECOST. 

If the apostles had so understood their commis- 
sion, that infants were thereafter to be disfranchised 
of their ancient Church 'rights, we might naturally 
expect to find them, on all suitable occasions, de- 
nouncing, as anti-pedobaptists now do, this old ob- 
solete Jewish practice. But when or where in all 
their writings or sermons do we find them thus em- 
ployed ? The history of the Church shows that in 
every instance where a new sect has been formed by 
a branch broken from an old denomination, that 
every thing believed and practiced by the parent, 
from which the child dissents is made to pass 
through the closest scrutiny of controversy. But 
on this subject the apostles wrote and spoke not one 
word in opposition, but in several instances sanc- 
tioned the Church rights of children for which we 
plead. 

On the day of Pentecost we hear St. Peter pro- 



252 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

claim to the multitude, " Repent, and be baptized 
every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for 
the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift 
of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, 
and to your children, and to all that are afar off, 
even as many as the Lord our God shall call." 
Acts ii, 38, 39. 

I. St. Peter was himself a Jew, educated accord- 
ing to their ancient faith and practice. 

II. His hearers were mostly Jews, and, conse- 
quently, would understand Peter according to their 
own well-understood modes of interpretation ; espe- 
cially when he employed language in common use 
among them, and were not informed that he was to 
be understood in any different sense. They had 
been accustomed for many* hundreds of years to re- 
ceive infants into the Church, both by circumcising 
and by baptizing them; and would of course under- 
stand every allusion made by Peter to their children 
as agreeing with this custom, unless positively in- 
formed to the contrary. 

III. Consider the relation which the conjunctive 
particle yap, gar, "for," in verse 39, bears to the 
preceding part, of the discourse. rap, gar, is what 
is called, in the language of grammarians, a " causal 
conjunction" and in Latin signifies enim, quippe, 
igitur ; and in English, for, or because. (See 
Buttnian's Greek Grammar; Robinson's Greek and 
English Lexicon.) "It always expresses the reason 
of what has been previously spoken or implied, in 
the same connection. Now, the question is, to 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 253 

what word or words in the preceding part of the 
discourse does yap, gar, refer? If we can fix its 
proper causal relation, we shall be at no loss to 
comprehend the force of Peter's argument. There 
are but three facts to which it can allude, and of 
which it can be considered as assigning a reason. 
Does it refer to either of these facts separately? 
and if so, to which one? or does it refer generally 
to all the preceding part of Peter's discourse, con- 
tained in verse 38 ? After mature reflection, I am 
inclined to adopt the latter opinion. I will lay be- 
fore the reader an analysis of the whole argument, 
so as to enable him to judge for himself. If yap, 
gar, be referred back to pst avowant s, metanoesate — 
repent ye — then the sense would be indicated by 
the following grammatical connection : Repent ye, . . 
because the promise is unto you" etc. 

If yap relate to jSart^tG^T'co, baptistlieto — be bap- 
tized — then the grammatical connection would stand 
thus: " Be baptized every one of you, . . . BECAUSE 
the promise is unto you," etc. 

If yap refer to the declaration, "Kq^ectQs i^v 
Sioptav tov dyiov Uvsvfjia'to^ — Ye shall receive the gift 
of the Holy Ghost — then the grammatical relation 
would stand thus : " Ye shall receive the gift of the 
Holy Ghost, BECAUSE the promise is unto you" etc. 

The first of the foregoing constructions would re- 
quire yap, gar, to be understood as expressing the 
reason for their repentance ; the second, the reason 
for their baptism ; and the third, the reason why they 
should expect to receive the Holy Ghost. 



254 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Now, either of these constructions would make a 
good doctrinal sense; but we consider yap to refer 
to all that is advanced in the thirty-eighth verse; 
first, because it better suits the plan of Luke by 
giving very general statements of Peter's argument; 
secondly, yap no more fitly relates to one of the 
above-mentioned antecedents than another. It is 
as really a reason for their baptism, or their repent- 
ance, as for their receiving the Holy Spirit: and 
vice versa. Thirdly, it better suits all the circum- 
stances of the occasion to fix the causal relation of 
this conjunction to all the facts mentioned in the 
thirty-eighth verse. 

For instance, the preaching of Peter had pro- 
duced a powerful effect: "They were pricked in 
their heart, and said unto Peter, and to the rest, . . . 
Men and brethren, what shall we do?" The first 
emotions of their remorse had produced a temporary 
despair; truly, they thought, we have forfeited not 
only Church rights, but all hopes of mercy. Peter 
exhorts them to repentance; to assume Church ob- 
ligations in the Christian form; and encouraged 
them to look for the gift of the Holy Spirit. All 
these directions suited the urgency of the moment; 
and he proves their appropriateness and adaptation 
to his Jewish brethren by adding, " Because the 
[ancient covenant] promise [Gen. xvii, 7, to the 
fullness of which Joel has referred in chap, ii, 28] 
is unto you, and to your children," etc. (Hibbard 
on Baptism, pp. 147, 148.) 

IY. To what "promise" does Peter refer in verse 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 255 

39 ? Anti-pedoba/ptists claim that Peter referred, in 
this instance, as he evidently did in verses 17, 18, to 
Joel ii, 28. But "it does not appear that they 
were in any particular need of encouragement in 
order to enable them to embrace the promise of 
Joel ii, 28. On the contrary, it does seem plain 
that their immediate concern was to know whether 
they might expect pardon and a restoration to cov- 
enant, or Church blessings — for which the Abra- 
hamic promise directly provided — thinking, proba- 
bly — and certainly with much reason — that if they 
were not excluded from the covenant, they might 
yet hope for the Spirit's effusion .... If the apostle 
had intended a direct quotation from, or an exclu- 
sive allusion to, Joel ii, 28, he would undoubtedly 
have adopted a phraseology more closely answering 
to the words and doctrine of that passage. In de- 
scribing the persons upon whom the ' Spirit 7 should 
be 'poured out' in the latter — that is, Gospel — - 
days, Joel speaks only of adults. He speaks of 
'sons and daughters/ of 'old men and young 
men/ of 'servants and handmaids/ It will not 
be doubted that the prophet intends only adults 
by these descriptions, unless the words 'sons and 
daughters' should be supposed to include infants. 
But it is evident that he uses D1J3, banim, and 
DUD, banoih, as they are often used, to designate 
age, just as we would say youth and maidens, to des- 
ignate an age advanced from childhood, though 
yet tender; and so the seventy understood them, 
and rendered them by the corresponding Greek 



256 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

vvoij ivhioi, and Qvyafspss, thugateres — sons and daugh- 
ters, But Joel determines the question of the age 
of these sons and daughters by immediately add- 
ing, 'they shall prophesy .' . . . 

"But the apostle Peter does not employ a proper 
phraseology to designate adults only, and, therefore, 
can not be supposed to intend a direct quotation 
from Joel. Peter says, c The promise is [ypiv xav 
tots texvoti] to you [adults] and to your [infant] 
children. 7 If he had intended adults only, as Joel 
unquestionably did, he would have employed an- 
other phraseology. Ts xva, tekna, never means adults 
only, without being connected with qualifying and 
definitive circumstances. In verse seventeen, where 
Peter intends a quotation from Joel ii, 28, he uses 
the exact phraseology of the prophet, and says, c ot 
vioi vfuov xtxi <u 6vyateps$ v/xov' — your sons and your 
daughters shall prophesy, etc. But the intelligent 
reader need not be informed that tsxva — children — is 
not sufficiently explicit to be a quotation of viol xai 
Ovyatspss — sons and daughters- — and those, too, that 
are old enough to 'prophesy.' ;; (Hibbard on Bap- 
tism, pp. 148, 149.) 

The promise made to Abraham, recorded in Gen- 
esis xvii, 7, "And I will establish my covenant 
between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, in 
their generations, for an everlasting covenant; to be 
a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee/' is the 
promise here referred to. 

1. Because of its exact similarity in expression 
to the language of Peter. The promise made to 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 257 

Abraham says, " To thee and thy seed:" the promise 
quoted by Peter says, to you and to your children. 
How striking tbe resemblance! while that of 
Joel lias none ! 

2. The promise made to Abraham stood con- 
nected with the rite of initiation to Church privi- 
leges, which, under the old dispensation, was cir- 
cumcision; and the promise referred to and quoted 
by Peter stands in direct and immediate connection 
with the rite of initiation to Church privileges in 
its new form, which is baptism; while Joel refers 
to no rite of initiation under either dispensation. 

3. The promise made to Abraham says, "I will 
be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." 
This promise contains a pledge of all spiritual bless- 
ings, both general and particular. The promise of 
Joel — ii, 28 — though based upon the one made to 
Abraham, refers to a more mature and perfect de- 
velopment of the system of human redemption and 
general illumination peculiar to the dispensation of 
the Gospel, and was referred to by Peter, in verse 
seventeen, for the defense of the pious few, who, 
under the influence of the Holy Ghost, were ac- 
cused of drunkenness by these same Jews. But 
when these Jews became penitent and earnest seek- 
ers of salvation, Peter refers to the Abrahamic 
promise in its particular and personal character — 
containing the elemental principles of the system 
of redemption, as repentance, pardon, etc., for the 
encouragement of these now penitent Jews. Thus 
the object of Peter in quoting Joel, in verse seven- 

17 ^ 



258 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

teen, and in quoting Genesis xvii, 7, in the thirty- 
ninth verse, are widely different. 

Upon the whole, there appears to be not the least 
resemblance between the promise referred to in the 
thirty-ninth verse by Peter, and the one previously 
quoted from Joel, but in every particular a striking 
similarity between it and the one contained in the 
Abrahamic covenant; sufficient, at least, to fix it in 
the mind of e\ ?ry Jew as the one referred to. 

V. Let us ascertain the meaning of the word 
tsxva, tehna — children — as used in the thirty-ninth 
verse. 

"The usus loquendi sheds a perfectly clear and 
unequivocal light. Tsxvov, tehnon, means a child, 
whether male or female. It sometimes answers to 
the Hebrew ID, ben, as, in the plural form, in Gen- 
esis iii, 16 : i God said to the woman, . . in sorrow 
shalt thou bring forth [DUD, banim, tehna'] chil- 
dren/ This is the proper meaning of ^wm, tehna; 
but it has also a wider sense, and is used Hebrais- 
tically for descendants, posterity , without any determ- 
inate reference to age. But the primary meaning 
of tsxvov is a child; and this is indicated by its 
etymology, being derived from tixtco, tihto, to bring 
forth. . . The question is, therefore, does tsxva mean 
children proper, or only posterity in general ? To 
determine this, we ask, Is any thing affirmed of the 
tsxva, tehna, in the text that is inapplicable to chil- 
dren proper? The answer is certainly in the nega- 
tive. There is nothing absurd or unsuitable in the 
supposition that children should be made the sub- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 259 

jects of a spiritual promise; in other words, that 
they should be made the subjects of Divine grace. 
Then it follows that tsxva, telcna, may be under- 
stood in its literal and more simple acceptation, as 
denoting children proper, although the more general 
idea of posterity is not excluded. 

"This is the more probable, because in Genesis 
xvii, 7, when Jehovah promises to 'be a God unto 
Abraham, and to his seed/ — ^jmj, d7tspu,atos — the 
Jews understood the promise as applying to them- 
selves and their infant children; and hence also the 
token of the covenant — circumcision — was applied 
to their infant children, as indicating their right to 
the promise. Every Jew, therefore, would unques- 
tionably understand the words of the apostle Peter 
as applying to himself and his infant offspring. 

But if we take tsxva, tekna, in its broadest appli- 
cation, to denote posterity, the result will be the 
same ; for what is our idea of posterity but that of 
a generation, or of generations of human beings, 
comprising adults and infants? To say that the 
word posterity means only adults, is to assume a 
position in the argument too absurd and ridiculous 
to merit a serious refutation." (Hibbard on Bap- 
tism, pp. 143, 144, 145.) 

" How idle a thing it is for a man to come with a 
lexicon in his hand to inform us that tsxva, tehna — 
children — means posterity ! Certainly it does ; and 
so, consequently, means the youngest infants." 
(Edwards on Baptism.) 

VI. The applicability of the whole passage to chil- 



260 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

dren as well as adults. It will be said, of course, 
that if *£xva } tekna, means infant children, and 
yap, gar, refers to the previous verse as a causal 
reason, etc., then infants, as well as adults, must 
repent as well as be hajptized, receive the Holy 
Ghost, etc. 

As it regards repentance, although it, like bap- 
tism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, are all em- 
braced as duties and privileges, applicable, like the 
promise, to both classes of candidates, yet there is 
no arbitrary rule requiring repentance invariably to 
precede baptism, only where repentance is necessary 
to qualify them for baptism. Infants are not com- 
petent to repent, nor do they need repentance to 
qualify them for baptism. But as soon as repent- 
ance is necessary it is their duty to repent, and 
their previous consecration to God in baptism con- 
templates and enjoins this duty as soon as they are 
able to perform it. Peter did not pause to give 
this explanation, nor was it necessary to the people 
he was addressing. Every sentence, therefore, and 
word in this passage is applicable to infant chil- 
dren. "The Jews had been accustomed, for many 
hundred years, to receive infants by circumcision 
into the Church; and this they did, as before ob- 
served, because God had promised to 'be a God to 
Abraham and to his seed/ They had understood 
this promise to mean parents, and their infant off- 
spring; and this idea was become familiar by the 
practice of many centuries. What, then, must 
have been their views, when one of their own 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 261 

community says to theni, 'The promise is unto you 
and to your children V If the practice of receiv- 
ing infants was founded on a promise exactly simi- 
lar, as it certainly was, how could they possibly 
understand him but as meaning the same thing, 
since he himself used the same mode of speech? 
This must have been the case, unless we admit this 
absurdity; namely, that they understood him in a 
sense to which they had never been accustomed. . . 
Certainly all men, when acting, will understand 
words in that way which is most familiar to them; 
and nothing could be more familiar to the Jews 
than to understand such a speech as Peter's to mean 
adults and infants; so that if the Jews, the awak- 
ened Jews, had apprehended the apostle to mean 
only adults when he said, 'to you and your chil- 
dren/ they must have had an understanding of such 
a peculiar construction as to make that sense of a 
word, which to them was totally unnatural and 
forced, to become familiar and easy." (Edwards on 
Baptism, pp. 67, 68.) 

" When a positive institute is connected with a 
promise, all who are contained in the promise have 
a right to the institute. I think any one may be 
compelled to grant this, as it is certainly an unde- 
niable truth ; for if parents must, therefore, be cir- 
cumcised because they are included in the promise, 
then infants are also included in the promise; they, 
too, must be circumcised. All this is evidenced by 
the history of circumcision, and is, indeed, a self- 
evident case, because, if a promise give a right to 



262 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

an institute, the institute must belong to all who 
are interested in the promise. And, therefore, we 
may reason thus : If parents must be baptized be- 
cause the promise belongs to them, then must their 
infants be baptized, because the promise belongs to 
them also. This mode of reasoning is the more 
certain, as it is confirmed, beyond all doubt, by the 
Divine procedure; for if you ask, Who are the cir- 
cumcised ? the reply is, Those to whom the promise 
was made. If you inquire again to whom the prom- 
ise was made, we answer, To adults and infants. 
Again : if you ask, Who are the baptized ? the 
answer is, Those to whom the promise is made. 
But to whom is it made? The apostle says, 'To 
you and your children/ Now, what proof more 
direct can be made or desired for infant baptism V 
(Edwards on Baptism, pp. 74, 75.) 

Bishop Burnett says, "When the apostles, in 
their first preaching, told the Jews that the prom- 
ises were made to them and to their children, the 
Jews must have understood it according to what 
they were already in possession of; namely, that 
they could initiate their children into their religion, 
bring them under the obligations of it, and procure 
to them a share in those blessings that belonged to 
it. ;; (Exposition of the twenty-nine Articles, Art. 
27.) Thus did Peter recognize the right of infants 
to membership, and consequently authorized their 
baptism on the day of Pentecost. 



BIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 263 

SECTION 71. 

ST. PAUL BAPTIZED BELIEVERS AND THEIR HOUSEHOLDS. 

Both St. Paul and St. Luke were Jews by birth, 
education, and religion, till converted to Christ; 
and when converted, their religious views were 
changed only so far as Christ, or the Holy Ghost, 
positively dictated a change. We are therefore un- 
der the necessity of interpreting their language, in 
every instance, according to the Jewish modes of 
interpretation. Having ascertained that it was an 
established custom, from the days of Abraham 
down, to admit believing parents and their infant 
children, by the rite of initiation, into the Church 
of God; and having proven that when the Lord 
Jesus Christ changed the form of the rite, he did 
not deprive infants of their right of initiation into 
the Church, these facts will greatly assist us in 
getting a correct understanding of some facts con- 
nected with the ministry of St. Paul. 

I. We will examine Acts xvi, 14, 15 : "And a 
certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of 
the city of Thyatira, which worshiped God, heard 
us : whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended 
unto the things which were spoken of Paul. And 
when she was baptized, and her household, she be- 
sought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faith- 
ful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide 
there," etc. 

1. Lydia was a native of Thyatira, a city famous 



264 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

for the manufacture of purple, but now residing in 
Philippi, and engaged in the sale of the purple 
manufactured in Thyatira. This woman, it is said, 
previously to hearing the apostle, " worshiped G-od ;" 
that is, she was a proselyte to the Jewish religion, 
and, consequently, had previously received baptism 
in the Jewish form. 

2. Let us examine the term "household" as used 
in this connection. We have no proof other than 
this term, understood according to Jewish phrase- 
ology, to prove that Lydia's household contained 
infants. 

The question, therefore, which we are now to 
decide is, Does oixo$, oikos — translated household — 
properly include infants? u Oixo$, oikos, primarily 
denotes a house; that is, a building or edifice, domus; 
but by a very common rule of language it also sig- 
nifies all that dwell in a house ; that is, a family, 
including parents, children, etc., . . . all those per- 
sons which we range under the general title of 
family, or household. The point to be ascertained 
is, whether infants are naturally, and, as a matter 
of course, included in this phrase ? The opponents 
of infant baptism take the ground that infants can 
not be proved to have been included in the c house- 
holds ' which the apostles baptized, because they 
are not specified, and it is well known there are 
households, or families, without infant children. 
We take the ground that, although oixos, oikos, 
does not specify children, yet children are properly 
included within the term, as much as parents, etc. ; 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 265 

.... and the presumption is, that they are always 
thus included, unless there is a specification to the 
contrary. The word family does not necessarily 
specify parents; a family may be constituted, or 
subsist, without the relation of parents; but does 
this authorize us to infer that parents are never in- 
cluded in this word unless they are specified by a 
distinct and appropriate appellation? . . . From 
this we conclude that, as children are properly in- 
cluded under the general term household, therefore 
the presumption is, children were baptized. 'Not 
so/ says a Baptist; 'the term household does not 
specify infants; there are many households that 
do not include infants; therefore, the baptism of 
households does not in any way prove the baptism 
of infants/ Well said ! Admirable logic ! But 
hold ! Will this principle of interpretation hold 
good in other cases ? Let us try. The term house- 
hold does not specify domestics of any kind. There 
are many households without any servants whatever. 
Nor does the term specify children that are grown 
up. There are many households that are composed 
of the husband and wife, or only one of them, and 
the servants; therefore, the baptism of households 
does not prove the baptism of servants of any kind, 
or of children of any age, unless they are specified 
by a distinct and appropriate name; therefore, 
there were no domestics of any kind, or children of 
any age, baptized by Paul in the households of 
Lydia, the jailer, and Stephanas, because no specifi- 
cations to this effect appear. Finally, as no individ- 



266 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

uals but Lydia, tlie jailer, and Stephanas are speci- 
fied — as the term ( household ? specifies no particular 
persons, or class of persons — therefore, it can not be 
proved that any particular persons but those three 
• were baptized on those occasions. . . . But we 
maintain that we have the same authority for sup- 
posing that children were included in those house- 
holds, and were consequently baptized, as for sup- 
posing that any other individuals were included in 
them and were baptized." (Hibbard on Baptism, 
pp. 153-155.) 

Children are a much more natural and common 
branch of a household than servants of any kind or 
age. It is more natural and much more in accord- 
ance with previous custom, to suppose that children 
belonged to the household of Lydia — especially 
when she is spoken of separately from the " house- 
hold" — and were consequently baptized with her, 
than to suppose any other persons are referred to 
by the term " household." 

3. Anti-pedobaptists have tried hard to make up a 
u household" for Lydia without children. It has 
been supposed that Lydia brought her merchandise 
from Thyatira in an unfinished state, and conse- 
quently had in her employ several journeymen dy- 
ers to prepare her goods for market. There is not 
only no proof, but no probability of this being true. 

Dr. Clarke says, "Lydia probably had her name 
from the province of Lydia, in which the city of Thy- 
atira was situated. The Lydian women have been 
celebrated for their beautiful purple manufactures. 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 267 

Now, in the absence of proof, is there the slight- 
est probability that this woman left her native city, 
where purple was extensively manufactured by the 
women, with her goods in an unfinished state, and 
then employed help in a foreign city, among stran- 
gers, to prepare her unfinished goods for market? 
Again : it has been said, " that there is no evidence 
that Lydia was ever married, and if not, her house- 
hold could not have been composed of her own 
children." We answer, St. Luke does not attempt 
to give a perfect history of Lydia and of her family 
connections. Her husband might have been dead, 
or he may have been absent from home, or he may 
have been present; but not being converted with 
his wife, St. Luke had no occasion to mention him 
in connection with his wife or her household. These 
numerous conjectures, in our opinion, only show 
the weakness of their cause, and the absence of all 
substantial proof on the opposite side of the ques- 
tion. 

It will be recollected that we do not claim the 
proof to be positive that Lydia' s " household" did 
contain children, but we claim that the term oixov, 
oikon — house — when figuratively used to describe a 
family, naturally embraces the young children, as 
well as other members of the family. It is thus 
used in 1 Timothy iii, 4 : "One that ruleth well his 
own [chxo*/] house, having his [^^a] children in 
subjection," etc. 

4. The circumstances mentioned in connection 
with the baptism of Lydia' s household, favor the 



268 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

idea of the household being composed of young 
children. 

(1.) It is said that while Paul was discoursing to 
the women, on the bank of the river, among them 
was Lydia, " whose heart the Lord opened, that she 
attended unto the things which were spoken of 
Paul." 

Now, if Lydia 7 s household was composed of 
adults, who were converted to Christ, is it not a lit- 
tle remarkable that Lydia is the only person spoken 
of as having her " heart opened," or of u attending 
to the things which were spoken of Paul V Lydia 
was the only convert made, and she was a Jewish 
proselyte; and upon the profession of her faith, 
Lydia' s household — children — as had long been the 
custom in the Church of God, was baptized. How 
perfectly consistent the whole transaction appears 
upon the supposition that Lydia' s household were 
children, and baptized with her on the profession 
of her faith ! 

(2.) " Another point that perhaps is worthy of 
mention, as indicating that Lydia only, of all the 
members of her house, believed, is, that when she 
invites the apostle and Silas to tarry for a time at 
her house, she says, 'If ye have judged me to be 
faithful, come into my house/ etc. Had there 
been other believing adults besides herself, it might 
seem most modest for her at least to have hinted it, 
and to have said, 'If ye have judged us to be 
faithful/ etc. This might seem especially suitable, 
as there appeared a strong reluctance in Paul and 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 269 

Silas to comply with her entreaties." (Hibbard on 
Baptism, p. 156.) 

These facts are presented, not as proof positive, 
abstractly considered, but as furnishing, in connec- 
tion with the previous history of the Church upon 
this point, very clear presumptive evidence that 
infants were baptized by the apostles, and received 
into the Church with their believing parents, as 
provided for in the everlasting covenant. 

II. The next, in course, is the jailer's house, 
recorded in Acts xvi, 31-34: "And they said, Be- 
lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be 
saved, and thy house. And they spake unto him 
the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his 
house. And he took them the same hour of the 
night, and washed their stripes, and was baptized, 
and all his, straightway. And when he had 
brought them into his house, he set meat before 
them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his 
house." 

For the sake of system, we will examine each 
verse in the above passage separately : 

1. The thirty-first verse: "And they said, Be- 
lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be 
saved, and thy house." 

(1.) The word oixo$, oikos — house — literally signi- 
fies a dwelling-place. See Matt, xx, 11 : "Murmured 
against the good man of the [o<,*o$] house." Matt, 
xxiii, 38: "Your [otxoj] house is left," etc. 
. (2.) But its most frequent use in the New Testa- 
ment is metaphor iced j in which case it generally sig- 



270 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

nifies the family; and if the parents are otherwise 
specified, the children of the family dwelling in a 
particular house. 1 Tim. v, 14: "I will, therefore, 
that the younger women marry, bear children, guide 
the [chkos] house," etc. 2 Tim. i, 16: "The Lord 
give mercy to the [ot*$>] house of Onesiphorus," 
etc. Acts xvi, 14: "And when she was baptized, 
and her [Wos] household," etc. 

(3.) The verb Tttcetsvaov, pisteuson — believe — is in 
the singular number, and was addressed only to the 
jailer, which would not have been the case if other 
adult persons were embraced. The jailer, as will be 
seen in the thirtieth verse, had taken the apostles 
out of the prison into the house, when Paul said to 
him, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou 
shalt be saved, and thy house." Now, one of the 
following statements must be true — the reader can 
take his choice: First, the jailer's dwelling-house 
was to be saved by his faith ; or, second, adult per- 
sons living in his family were to be saved by his 
faith; or, third, his "house" is to be understood 
metaphorically for his children, who were to be 
saved by the faith of their parent. We confess 
ourselves incapable of seeing any Scriptural and 
spiritual sense in which the faith of the jailer could 
save either his dwelling-house or adult persons dwell- 
ing with him, while it is certain that there is a very 
important sense in which the faith of a father con- 
verted from heathenism does save his little children. 
He saves them from the darkness, idolatries, and 
crimes peculiar to a heathen state; he saves them 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 271 

by placing them in a solemn covenant relation with 
God in which he has promised to be a "God to 
fchein" forever; he saves them by bringing them 
into the Christian Church, where there are secured 
to them all the instruction, watch-care, and other 
religious privileges of the Gospel; he saves them 
by governing, instructing, and praying for them, ac- 
cording to the direction of the Gospel. And if the 
word of God can be relied upon, there are but few 
children thus "trained/' that, when "old/' will 
"depart from it." Now, till our opposers can show 
that the faith of one adult person will thus save 
other adult persons, we shall consider the point es- 
tablished, or, at least, rendered quite probable, that 
the jailer's "house" was composed of "little chil- 
dren," which the apostle wanted him to bring with 
him to Christ. 

2. The thirty-second verse: "And they spake 
unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were 
in his [oixiu, oikia] house." The word here em- 
ployed by the historian — otxta, oikia, house — signi- 
fies a dwelling -place. Whether there were any other 
adults present than the jailer, is not said; but per- 
haps it is not taxing the imagination too much to 
suppose that some of the children may have been 
old enough to understand in some measure what was 
said, and yet be suitable subjects for baptism. To 
suppose that there were servants and other adults 
present, is all imaginary, without one word to sup- 
port it. They were not now in the prison, wjiere 
the inmates of that department could be embraced, 



272 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

but in the jailer's own house, with none but its 
ordinary and proper occupants present. To all these 
the apostle " spake the word of the Lord;" to what 
effect we are not informed. 

3. The thirty-third verse: "And he took them 
the same hour of the night, and washed their 
stripes, and was baptized, he and all his, straight- 
way." Who was meant by "all his," we have pre- 
viously shown to have been his family. And these, 
being baptized upon the faith of the jailer, must, 
therefore, have been "little children." And this 
was in perfect accordance with the practice of the 
Church since the days of Abraham, and fully au- 
thorized by the everlasting covenant with its modi- 
fied token; and whenever the jailer's children be- 
came believers, it could be said of each, "he be- 
lieveth and is baptized," according to the commis- 
sion given to the apostles. 

4. The thirty-fourth verse : "And when he had 
brought them into his house, he set meat before 
them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his 
house." 

(1.) The word oixov, oikon — house — in the first 
instance, refers literally to the jailer's dwelling, to 
which they returned after baptism; the second 
instance, at the close of the verse, is supplied by 
our translators without any word in the original an- 
swering to it. This word, therefore, proves nothing 
on either side. 

(2.) The word "with," in tfie last sentence, also 
has nothing answering to it in the original, being 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 273 

only supplied by our translators to give what they 
supposed to be the sense of the passage; it, there- 
fore, proves nothing on either side. And yet it is 
not a little remarkable that our opponents rely more 
upon these words than any other, to make out a be- 
lieving adult household for the jailer. 

(3.) H£7tt,Gi?£vxoi>s, pepisteukos — believing — is in the 
perfect tense, and signifies having believed. It is 
also in the singular number, referring only to the 
jailer. With these facts understood, we will give 
the following, as we consider, the exact translation 
of the passage : Having believed in God, lie rejoiced 
over all his. Havooxu — all his — all that belonged to 
him personally; as his family, or children. "How 
natural it is for a man newly converted, and whose 
children also are newly ingrafted into the covenant 
of promise, and consecrated to Grod, to rejoice in 
the conversion of his family; especially when he 
reflects upon the peculiar benefits they are hereafter 
to enjoy in their new relation to the Church of God, 
and the greatly-increased prospect of meeting them 
all in heaven ! 

"I know that it is said in the English version 
that the jailer 'rejoiced, or believed with all his 
house/ thus indicating that all the members of his 
house actively united in his rejoicings, or faith. 
But there is no such word as 'with' in the Greek 
text. It is not in the sentence, and it does not nec- 
essarily appear in the composition of rtavoixl, pa- 
noilci. The truth is, that 'with/ or 'in/ or some 
other ^particle, is left to be supplied by the sense. 
18 



274 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

'He rejoiced in all his house f that is, 'over his en- 
tire family." From an attentive observation, there- 
fore, of all the particular circumstances connected 
with the baptism of the jailer and his household, 
we find nothing to impair the force of the natural 
probability that Ttwoixi, panoiki, and the phrase 6* 
o/vtov rtavtss — all ivho were of him — imply and 
include children; and, as they were all baptized, 
the force of this scrap of history is evidently in 
favor of infant baptism." (Hibbard on Baptism, 
p. 159.) 

III. The third instance of household, or family 
baptism, is recorded in 1 Cor. i, 16: "And I bap- 
tized also the [o^ov] household of Stephanas." 
But it is argued by our opponents, that this family 
could not have embraced infant children, because — 
in chapter xvi, 15 — St. Paul says that they had 
u addicted themselves to the ministry of the 
saints," and that they took "a lead" in the affairs 
of the Church, and, consequently, the other mem- 
bers of the Church were commanded to " submit 
themselves unto such," etc. We reply, Stephanas 
himself, with Fortunatus and Achaicus, were now 
on a visit to the apostle, and probably were the 
bearers of the charity of the Church to him, which 
called forth this expression in relation especially to 
the household of Stephanas. " These families were 
the oldest Christians in Corinth; and as they were 
foremost in every good word and work, they were 
not only to be commended, but the rest were to be 
exhorted to serve under them as leaders in those 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 275 

works of charity. This appears to be the obvious 
sense of this otherwise obscure passage. . . . Still 
it is to be remembered that the baptism of the 
oldest children took place several years before. The 
house of Stephanas was the ' first-fruits of Achaia/ 
in which St. Paul began to preach not later than 
A. D. 51, while this Epistle could not have been 
written earlier, at least, than A. D. 57, and might 
be later. Six or eight years taken from the age of 
the sons and daughters of Stephanas, might bring 
the oldest to the state of early youth; and as to the 
younger branches, would descend to the ternT of 
infancy, properly so called. Still further, all that 
the apostle affirms of the benevolence and hospital- 
ity of the family of Stephanas is perfectly consist- 
ent with a part of his children being still very 
young at the time he wrote this Epistle. An equal 
commendation for hospitality and charity might be 
given at the present day, with perfect propriety, to 
many pious families, several members of which are 
still in a state of infancy." (Watson* s Institutes, 
Vol. II, pp. 642-644.) 

Furthermore, if these persons were adults when 
St. Paul baptized them, they would not now, six or 
eight years afterward, have been members of the 
household of Stephanas. 

"The familiar, and, as we may say, matter-of- 
course manner of mentioning these cases of family 
baptisms, clearly indicates that it was in perfect 
harmony with the universal custom of the apostles. 
Had it been any unusual thing, had infant baptism 



276 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

been unknown to the apostolic Church, and as ab- 
horrent to God as it is to our Baptist brethren, it is 
not at all probable that these cases would have 
been thus registered by the direction of the Holy 
Spirit, without unequivocal intimation that no in- 
fant children were included in the number of the 
baptized. As it is, however, it leaves upon the 
mind of the unbiased reader the impression of a 
strong probability not only that infants were in- 
cluded in those baptized households which are 
mentioned, but that hundreds, perhaps thousands, 
of families, were baptized in the same way, which 
is an advance of the argument that falls little short 
of the highest Scriptural authority. ... It is 
true that our Baptist brethren tell us they have 
baptized households. Mr. Pengilly tells us in his 
work on Baptism, that he 'has baptized households, 
and, among others, a "Lydia and her household," 
and yet never baptized a child f and concludes that 
Ho infer the baptism of infants from the word 
"household" is completely begging the question/ 
(Scripture Guide, p. 53.) 

"But the point upon which I wish to fix the 
reader's attention here, is the incongruity of such 
registers and such historic accounts, in the easy, 
familiar, and matter-of-course style of Luke, to the 
hypothesis that infant baptism was unknown and 
unpracticed by the apostles. A Baptist disputant, 
for the sake of giving effect to his argument, may 
record a household baptism which he himself had 
performed; but would he be likely, in sending home 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 277 

missionary reports, for instance, to return an ac- 
count of family baptisms in the same open, unquali- 
fied manner as that of Luke, in recording the bap- 
tism of Lydia's family? Or, furthermore, were a 
Baptist writing a history of the Baptist missions, or 
of the general Baptist denomination — a history that 
was to be read by future generations, when its au- 
thor, and all who now might have any personal 
knowledge of the facts recorded, would be no 
more — a history, one prominent object of which 
was to set forth the validity and true character of 
water baptism, as held and practiced by the Bap- 
tists — were a Baptist, I say, to write such a history, 
would he be likely to mention family baptisms in 
such an indefinite, familiar, and unqualified man- 
ner as to leave the impression upon thousands of 
minds that infants, being a natural part of a family, 
were to be baptized? Does it accord with our 
knowledge of the Baptists' views on this subject, 
to suppose that they would be likely to write so 
unguardedly as to leave the impression on the 
minds of many of their ingenious readers that they 
practiced infant baptism? And if the apostles, 
and the author of the book containing an account 
of their 'acts/ and the primitive Church, had all 
been opposed to infant baptism, or had been wholly 
ignorant of any such practice, I ask, would they 
have been likely to leave such an unguarded ac- 
count of their baptisms as to give the impression 
to thousands that they practiced infant baptism? 
Would an intelligent Arminian nowadays write 



278 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

concerning the doctrine of i free grace ' in terms that 
would be likely, from the natural force of words, to 
leave the impression that he was a believer in the 
( five points of Calvinism V And yet, absurd as would 
be the affirmative of these suppositions, it would not 
fully illustrate the absurdity of an anti-pedobaptist 
construction of the household baptisms of the New 
Testament; for here, according to the theory of 
our opponents, we not only have anti-peolobaptist 
authors — for such the Baptists suppose Luke and 
Paul to have been — writing about baptism in terms 
exactly calculated to leave the impression that in- 
fant baptism was an apostolic practice, but we are 
bound to believe that such an absurdity was sanc- 
tioned by the authority of the Holy Ghost." (Hib- 
bard on Baptism, pp. 162, 163.) 

Take the following as an illustration: "Two mis- 
sionaries have for a number of years been success- 
fully laboring for the conversion of a particular 
tribe of savages in the wilderness of America. We 
have heard of their labors and of their success, and 
have rejoiced in it, but have never learned, and 
have never to this day inquired, whether they prac- 
ticed infant baptism or not. For special reasons 
this now becomes a subject of inquiry; and the 
only means of information which we have at hand 
is a brief history which those missionaries have 
published of their labors. In that history, which is 
now subject to a careful examination, we find that 
they speak of several instances in which individu- 
als embraced Christianity and received baptism. 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 279 

And they inform us that at such a time they bap- 
tized one of the chiefs and his family; and that at 
another time they baptized such a man and all his; 
and again another man and his household. This is 
all the information they give. They mention, with- 
out explanation, the baptism of several persons and 
their households, and so make family baptisms a 
noticeable circumstance in the history of their mis- 
sions. Would not such a circumstance lead us to 
think it probable that they practiced infant bap- 
tism?" (Woods on Infant Baptism, pp. 81, 82.) 

But to make the two cases parallel, and to give 
the illustration its full force, we must, upon inquiry, 
find that these missionaries were themselves bap- 
tized in infancy, were educated within the pales of 
a Church which, from time immemorial, practiced 
it, while the constitution and all the standard wri- 
ters of the Church to which they belonged were in 
favor of it; and no evidence whatever could be 
found showing that they had ever renounced this 
particular doctrine or practice of the Church; for 
we have proven every one of the above facts to have 
existed in the case of the apostles, except that they 
were circumcised instead of baptized in infancy. 
If, without a knowledge of the facts last mentioned, 
the evidence for the baptism of little children in 
those households would be strongly presumptive, 
with them it is almost if not positively certain; 
for "the apostles wrote and spoke of them just as 
the Jews would in reference to household prose- 
lyting. The idea of proselyting households among 



280 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

the Jews was perfectly familiar, by which they un- 
derstood the bringing of the parents and children 
over to Judaism by circumcision, baptism, and sac- 
rifice. The practice of discipling and baptizing 
households among the early Christians appears 
equally familiar and equally common to record. 
We say, therefore, that family baptisms, as re- 
corded in the New Testament, exactly coincide 
with, and strongly corroborate, the doctrine of 
infant baptism." (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, pp. 
164, 165.) 

The fact that the instances of family baptism on 
record are but few, though often referred to by our 
opponents, is of no weight at all as an argument; 
for the truth of any doctrine does not depend upon 
any definite number of texts of Scripture support- 
ing it. Three are as good as a dozen. And when 
a doctrine of importance, or a Christian duty hav- 
ing an important bearing, is once fully established 
upon Scriptural authority, as has been done with 
the doctrine and practice of inducting infant chil- 
dren into the Church of Christ with their believing 
parents, it is not necessary to follow down the 
stream of Divine revelation and prove over and 
over again the continuation of that doctrine or 
practice; but it is for the opposers of that doctrine 
or practice to show conclusively that they have 
been disannulled by the same authority that first 
established them. Take for example the Sabbath 
day. "The Sabbath was instituted at the creation; 
and though toeehs are mentioned in the sacred his- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 281 

tory, the Sahbatli is not again mentioned till Mo- 
ses — a period of more than two thousand four hun- 
dred years — yet how important the Sabbath was 
considered in the sight of God is well known. 
Again : it is not mentioned from the time of 
Joshua till the reign of David — a period of about 
four hundred years — and yet, as says Dr. Hum- 
phrey, 'it will be admitted that, beyond all doubt, 
the pious judges of Israel remembered the Sabbath 
day to keep it holy/ Moreover, the Bible says 
nothing of circumcision from a little after Moses 
till the days of Jeremiah, a period of eight hun- 
dred years; yet, doubtless, circumcision was prac- 
ticed all the while. " (Rev. E. Hall on Baptism, 
pp. 168, 169.) 

If the baptism of infants had been new, or a sub- 
ject of dispute, we would have heard of it more 
frequently, and in more express terms. But being, 
from time immemorial, in constant practice, the 
apostles thought it necessary to speak of it but sel- 
dom, and in an incidental, familiar way; so that, 
instead of the few incidental, familiar instances, in 
which the sacred history refers to family baptisms, 
weakening, it strengthens the evidence that infant 
Church membership was continued in the Church 
of Christ by the authority and example of the 
apostles. 



282 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 



SECTION VII. 

THE APOSTLES RECOGNIZED CHILDREN AS SUSTAINING TO GOD 

AND TO THE CHURCH A RELATION WHICH IMPLIES 

MEMBERSHIP AND BAPTISM. 

It is not the abstract question of baptism that 
has engrossed our attention from the commencement 
of this work; but it is the relation in which the 
divine Being has placed them to himself and to 
his Church, and the blessings and privileges con- 
nected with those relations. Baptism is but the 
divinely-appointed mode of publicly and visibly ac- 
knowledging these relations. And unless Christian 
parents and the Christian Church are sufficiently 
enlightened to understand the solemn duties and 
weighty obligations which these relations imply, 
and which, by the baptism of their children, they 
assume; and unless they feel disposed, yea, determ- 
ined, by divine grace to perform those duties, it 
would certainly be more to the credit of Christian- 
ity to dispense with baptizing them. But we must 
now proceed to point out the different relations to 
God and his Church assigned to children by the 
apostles, which imply baptism and Church mem- 
bership. 

I. St. Paul says — 1 Cor. vii, 14 — "For the unbe- 
lieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the 
unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; else 
were your children unclean, but now are the} 
holy." 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 283 

When we understand the subject of which an 
author is treating, no difficulty can occur in determ- 
ining the sense in which he employs words, if he 
employ them according to their usual acceptation. 

1. What, then, was the occasion of the apostle's 
remarks. In the first verse of the above chapter 
the apostle says, "Now concerning the things 
whereof ye wrote unto me/' etc. ; from which it ap- 
pears that the Corinthians had fallen into trouble 
over certain subjects about which they had written 
for his official decision. One of these questions 
was, whether a believing husband or wife may con- 
tinue to live in conjugal relations with an unbeliev- 
ing partner, innocently, and without forfeiting mem- 
bership in the Church. To this question the apos- 
tle responds from the tenth to the sixteenth verse. 
ic The uninformed reader will not fully appreciate 
the true character of this question, or the import- 
ance which it assumed in the Corinthian Church, 
unless the nature and occasion of the controversy 
be fully explained. It was this: the Jews re- 
garded even the touch of a Gentile as unclean, and 
as producing such a legal defilement as to unfit them 
for any of the solemn ceremonies of their religion. 
It was, hence, unlawful for a Jew to company with 
them in any way. The Pharisees, who were the 
most rigid in their observance of the law of any of 
the Jewish sects, adding many superstitions to their 
religion, always lustrated themselves after having 
returned home from the market, or any public way 
or thoroughfare, lest they should have contracted 



284 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

uncleanness by having touched some unclean per- 
son or thing. They also frequently purified their 
household furniture. It was this kind of sanctity 
that led them to complain of Jesus for receiving 
'sinners and publicans/ and eating with them. It 
was this scrupulous state of opinion that caused 
Peter to hesitate, at first, to go with the messen- 
gers of Cornelius, they being Gentiles. The whole 
history of that transaction is a striking illustration 
of the power which these Jewish notions still held 
over the consciences of many Christian converts 
from Judaism. 

"From very ancient days God had warned his 
people against intermarriages with idolatrous and 
unbelieving nations. 'Neither shalt thou make mar- 
riages with them ; thy daughter shalt thou not give 
unto his son/ and the reason for this prohibition 
is thus given : i For they will turn away thy son 
from following me, that they may serve other gods/ 
Deut. vii, 3, 4; Exod. xxxiv, 15, 16. This was an 
important requisition, issued in order to secure the 
distinct preservation of the Hebrew people, as well 
as to preserve the purity of their religion. A re- 
markable instance is recorded in the book of Ezra — 
chapters nine and ten — of an extensive breach of 
this command, when, after the return of the cap- 
tives from Babylon, 'the people of Israel, and the 
priests, and the Levites, did not separate themselves 
from the people of the land, but took of their 
daughters for themselves and for their sons ; so that 
the holy seed mingled themselves with the people 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 285 

of those lands/ Chap. ix, 1, 2. The sequel shows 
that they were obliged to 'put away' these heathen 
partners, although in some instances the dissolution 
of the marriage union occasioned not only a separa- 
tion of husband and wife, but of parents and chil- 
dren. Chap. x, 44. 

"Such were the prevalent notions of the Jews 
relative to marriage in the days of Paul. And as 
they had colonized themselves every-where before 
the Christian era, so the apostles found them in all 
the cities of note, and countries where they traveled. 
Many of these Jews were converted to Christianity, 
and incorporated into the Christian Church, bring- 
ing with them frequently their Jewish prejudices, 
and fomenting controversies among the Gentile con- 
verts on many points of doctrine, which had their 
origin in the now obsolete forms of the Jewish 
ritual. Thus was it with the Church at Corinth. . . . 
And here I wish the reader to remark, that the 
question did not at all relate to the lawfulness of 
marriage, or the continuance of the marriage cove- 
nant, in a civil sense. It was a question to be set- 
tled by ecclesiastical, not by civil law." (Hibbard 
on Infant Baptism, p. 124.) 

The answer of the apostle is as follows : If u any 
brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be 
pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 
For the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the hus- 
band," etc. According to the principles of the 
Gospel, unbelief in one of the parties furnishes no 
good reason for a separation, but furnishes an 



286 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

opportunity for the believing party to accomplish 
much good, both to the unbelieving party and to 
the children. So far the apostle is easily under- 
stood. 

2. Let us ascertain the signification of the fol- 
lowing words used by the apostle : 

(1.) "Hyiaa-tcu, liegiastai, is a conjugated form of 
the verb oytafw, hagiazo, which means to separate, 
consecrate, sanctify, make holy, etc." (Robison's 
Grr. and Eng. Lexicon, art. Aytafio.) 

From the above significations, our translators have 
selected the third — sanctify — and this has thrown 
controversialists into great confusion, to find some 
sense in which either the Lord or the believing par- 
ent could sanctify the unbelieving parent; whereas, 
to us it seems quite certain that the first, "to sepa- 
rate," gives the true meaning of the apostle; that 
is, the believing party should remain with the un- 
believing, so that by the example, the admonitions, 
and active faith of the believer, the unbelieving 
may be induced to separate " from the worship of 
idols, and the practices of the heathen;" all of 
whom were regarded as being " common," or "un- 
sanctified." The reformation of the unbelieving 
was regarded by the apostle as being far more cer- 
tain by continuing the conjugal relation, than by 
separation. And inasmuch as the ecclesiastical im- 
pediment was now removed, and the parties could 
remain together without sin, or even the least im- 
propriety, therefore, "if any brother hath a wife 
that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 287 

him, let him not put her away. And the woman 
which hath a husband that believeth not, and if he 
be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 
For the unbelieving husband is" separated — ^yuxtf- 
tai — from heathenism "by the wife/ 7 "and the un- 
believing wife is," in like manner, "sanctified/' or 
separated, "by the husband." 

In addition to the above,, it may be said with pro- 
priety, "that, by reason of the connection of the 
believing party with the Church, the unbelieving 
partner was thereby placed more directly before the 
religious sympathies of the Church, made more 
especially the subject of prayer and religious con- 
cern by them, and that they were obligated more 
directly to look after his spiritual welfare, than was 
the case in reference to the general mass of irrelig- 
ious persons; and that in this sense, the sanctity 
of the believing partner operating to enhance the 
religious privileges and prospects of the unbeliev- 
ing, the latter might be said to be sanctified, or, in 
some sense, brought under religious influence by 
the former." (See Hibbard on Infant Baptism, 
p. 129.) 

Again : the words *Jyca<jtfa& . . . ev ty ywcuxai, hegi- 
astai en te gunaikai, might, with the utmost propri- 
ety, be translated, is sanctified to the wife; that is, 
the unbelieving husband is sanctified to the believ- 
ing wife; and, also, the words riyicxG-tai . . . sv tfco 
avBptj hegiastai en to andri, is sanctified to the hus- 
band ; that is, the unbelieving wife is sanctified to 
the believing husband. In which case, the meaning 



288 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

of the apostle would be, let the believing partner 
remain with the unbelieving, because God hath con- 
secrated the unbelieving partner to the believing, 
by the removal of those ecclesiastical impediments 
which existed under the former dispensation. 

"The distinctions of clean and unclean were, at 
first, purely artificial, and were established by the 
will of God, not in the nature of the things them- 
selves. It is plain, therefore, that to sanctify these 
unclean things to the use of Christians, no positive 
change was required in the things themselves, but 
only that the arbitrary prohibition of the lawgiver 
be taken off. This sanctification, then, was, after 
all, merely of a negative character. After the ab- 
rogation of the Levitical code, all things reverted 
back to their original character. It then could be 
said, c Nothing is unclean of itself;' i All things are 
pure/ Levitically; ' Every creature of God is good, 
and nothing to be rejected/ " (Hibbard on Infant 
Baptism, p. 128.) 

While the servants of Cornelius were on their 
way to Joppa, in search of Peter, the apostle went 
upon the "house top," and there, in "a trance/' 
" saw a vessel descending unto him/' containing a 
great variety of animals, such as had been pro- 
nounced "unclean" by the law of Moses. Ha was 
commanded to "rise, kill, and eat." But Peter 
refused, because they were "common, or unclean." 
"And the voice spake unto him again the second 
time, What God hath cleansed, that call thou not 
common/' a clear intimation that the great law- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 289 

giver of the Jews had entirely abrogated those laws 
making a distinction between different animals, and 
between the Jews and Gentiles, calling the one clean 
and the other unclean. 

This sanctification " merely extends so far as to 
sanction the external intercourse of Christians with 
unbelievers. They might now dwell together in 
any of the natural or civil relations — as parents and 
children, as husbands and wives, as fellow-citizens, 
as neighbors, etc. — without any detriment to Church 
relations on the part of the believer, so long as his 
spirit and deportment accorded with the Gospel." 
(Hibbard on Infant Baptism, p. 127.) 

(2.) AxaOaptos — unclean. Groves defines it to 
signify " impure, unclean, defiled, unfit for receiv- 
ing the rites of religion." Dr. Robinson says it is 
"spoken of persons who are not Jews, or who do 
not belong to the Christian community." Schleus- 
ner says, "It signifies that which is prohibited 
by the Mosaic law, or from which the people of God 
were required to separate themselves." 

" In Acts x, 14-28, axaOaptos, ahathartosy is used 
to designate a Gentile, or ( a man of another nation' 
besides the Jews. Thus is it elsewhere used. So 
Isaiah lii, 1 : ' For henceforth there shall no more 
come to thee [Jerusalem] the uncircumcised and the 
unclean y — KD£)j (xxaB^toq. Here, the words un- 
clean and uncircumcised are perfectly synonymous, 
and apply to one and the same description of per- 
sons ; namely, all who were not Jews, all who were 
not in covenant with God. So, also, an unclean or 
19 



290 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

polluted land is a land inhabited by Pagans or idol- 
aters. Thus Amos vii, 17 : f And thou [Israel] shalt 
die in a polluted or unclean land' — Ki3D,a#a0aptfo$. 
This 'polluted land' was Assyria. It was in contra- 
distinction from all such idolatrous, or Pagan coun- 
tries, that Canaan was called the ( holy land/ . . . 
It is plain, therefore, that when the apostle says, 
'Else were your children unclean/ it is in perfect 
accordance with the usus loquendi to understand 
him to say, 'Else were your children Pagans, with- 
out the covenant/ This sense, the advance of the 
argument, and the nature of the subject, require us 
to understand." (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, 
p. 134.) 

(3.) "Aytoj, hagios — holy — is here used in con- 
trast with axaOaptos — unclean. A holy person, in 
the language of the text, is the exact opposite of 
an unclean person, and vice versa." (Hibbard on 
Baptism, p. 134.) 

But if unclean means a heathen, a holy person 
must be a Christian. If an unclean person is unfit 
for Church privileges, then a holy person must be 
entitled to these privileges. If an unclean person 
is one not in covenant with God, a holy person is one 
that is in covenant with God. 

"We have seen that the word sanctify, as applied 
to an unbeliever, in the former part of the verse, is 
restricted in its sense by the nature of the subject, 
to signify merely the abolishment of Jewish cere- 
monial distinctions, with regard to clean and un- 
clean persons, so as to render it now lawful for a 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 291 

believer and unbeliever to dwell together in mar- 
riage union, or in any other relation innocent in 
itself. This is perfectly plain. But the nature of 
the subject does not bind us to fix the same limited 
construction on the term lioly in the concluding part 
of the passage, and we appeal to the natural force 
of the apostle's argument, and the general Scrip- 
tural use of the term, in support of the sense above 
given. I will give the reader some examples of the 
use of this word in Scripture : 

"Matthew xxvii, 52: 'And many bodies of the 
[dyttti/, hagion] saints that slept arose/ Acts ix, 
13: 'Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by 
many of this man [Saul] how much evil he hath 
done to thy [aytotj, hagiois] saints at Jerusalem/ 
(See also chap, xxvi, 10.) Acts ix, 32: 'Peter 
came down also to the [dytoi^, hagious] saints that 
dwelt at Lydia/ Verse 41 : 'And when he had 
called the [ayiov^ hagious] saints and widows, he 
presented her alive/ Rom. i, 7: 'Grace to all that 
be at Rome . . . called to be [ayoois, hagiois] saints/ 
Rom. xv, 25: 'But now I go unto Jerusalem to 
minister unto the [dytot$, hagiois] saints/ Yerse 
xxvi : ' For it hath pleased them of Macedonia . . . 
to make a contribution to the poor [dywov] saints at 
Jerusalem/ (See also verse 31.) Rom. xvi, 2 : 
'That ye receive her [Phebe] in the Lord as be- 
cometh [dytcov] saints;' that is, Christians. Yerse 
15: 'Salute ... all the [dy«n^] saints/ etc. 1 Cor. 
i ; 2 : 'To them that are . . . called to be [oytotj 
saints/ that is, Christians. Chapter vi, 1 : 'Dare 



292 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

any of you ... go to law before the unjust and not 
before the [ayuooT] saints?' that is, Christians, the 
members of the Church. Chapter xiv, 33 : i God 
is the author of peace, as in all the Churches of 
the [oyccov] saints ' — Christians. Chapter xvi, 1 : 
'Now concerning the collections for the [ay«n;s] 
saints/ that is, Christians, Church members, who 
are poor. (See also verse 15; 2 Cor. i, 1; viii, 4; 
ix, 1-12.) 2 Cor. xiii, 13; 'All the [ay tot,] saints 
[Christians] salute you/ 

'•Besides these passages cited, the word occurs, 
where it is translated saints, about forty-one times 
in the New Testament; the signification in all these 
places being substantially the same. Here, also, I 
wish the reader to understand and appreciate the 
corroborating testimony drawn from the use of the 
corresponding Hebrew words. I have before men- 
tioned that, although the apostles spoke for the 
most part, and wrote wholly in the foreign Greek 
dialect, still they were Hebrews, educated in the 
Jewish religion and customs, and accustomed to 
think and to speak according to the Hebrew idiom. 
Hence, they sought out and employed those Greek 
words that more fitly conveyed Hebrew ideas; and 
hence we often are obliged to resort to the use of 
certain Hebrew words that were used to express the 
same idea, in order fully to establish the sense of 
the New Testament language. 

"Aytoj, hagios — holy — says Dr. Robinson, 'is 
used every-where in the Septuagint for £5hD, kodesh, 
and &TVQ, Jcadosh. Hence, the ground idea is 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 293 

pure, clean" (Greek and English Lexicon, art. 

Ayco$.) 

"Take a few examples. Exod. xix, 6: 'Ye shall 
be to me a holy nation ' — ssrpD, 07 «w — that is, a na- 
tion of saints, a consecrated nation. Exod. xxii, 
31: 'And ye shall be holy men unto me' — isno, 
ayio$ — that is, ye shall be saints, consecrated men. 
(See, also, Lev. xi, 44, 45; Num. xvi, 3, et alibi.) 
The Israelites were declared a holy people, not be- 
cause they were all morally holy; far from it; but 
because by profession they belonged to God, who 
had separated them from all other nations, and 
sanctified them unto himself by external rites; be- 
cause they professed the true religion, which many 
among them really attained in an illustrious degree ; 
and because 'to them were committed the oracles 
of God/ 'the covenant/ 'and the giving of the law 
and the promises/ " (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, 
pp. 135, 136.) 

The above Scriptures abundantly prove that the 
apostle, in saying that "children/' where one of the 
parents "believed/' were, in consequence, [dytoj,] 
holy, meant something more than ceremonial purity, 
such as was asserted of the unbelieving parent; 
while, at the same time, he did not mean that they 
were personally, evangelically pure. In but very 
few of the above instances can the word be thus 
understood. And the assertion would not be true, 
nor would it agree with other Scriptures in relation 
to the moral condition of children, who, though 
justified, are not morally holy. Therefore, avoiding 



294 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

these extremes, and yet giving the word holy the 
opposite signification from unclean, we are driven 
to the conclusion that he meant simply, that in con- 
sequence of the faith of the one believing parent, 
the "children" were entitled to a holy consecrated 
relation to God — a lioly covenant relation to the 
Church — that they stood as the children of believ- 
ing parents had ever stood, in covenant ivith God 
and his people. 

3. The reason assigned by the apostle why the 
believing partner should remain in conjugal connec- 
tion with the unbelieving : " Else were your children 
unclean; but now are they holy." 

Having asserted that there was no law now to 
prevent the two partners, one " believing," and the 
other "unbelieving," from innocently remaining 
together, he assigns the above as a reason why they 
should by all means thus remain. The effect it 
would have upon the children in each case has al- 
ready been fully explained by the signification of 
the terms employed; but in close connection with 
this, the following facts are worthy of the special 
attention of the reader: 

(1.) "The passage thus explained establishes the 
Church membership of infants in another form; 
for it assumes the principle that when both parents 
are reputed believers, their children belong to the 
Church of God as a matter of course. The whole 
difficulty proposed by the Corinthians to Paul grows 
out of this principle. Had he taught, or they un- 
derstood, that no children, be their parents believ- 



KIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 295 

ers or unbelievers., are to be accounted members of 
the Church, the difficulty could not have existed; 
for if the faith of both parents could not confer 
upon the child the privilege of membership, the 
faith of only one of them certainly could not." 
(Dr. J. M. Mason's Essay on the Church of God, 
Christian Magazine, xi, 49.) 

(2.) "The simple circumstance," continues Mr. 
Mason, "that Paul cites the relation of infants to 
the Church in proof of another subject, and one, 
too, of such grave importance as to involve the per- 
petual union of husband and wife, and the good 
order of families, clearly proves that the member- 
ship of infants was a point which was not only be- 
lieved, but it was universally believed; there ivas no 
difference of opinion, or dispute concerning it y in the 
Christian Church. The force of this argument I 
wish the reader to feel. In proving any doubtful 
point, the only rational method to be pursued is to 
advance facts or deductions from principles which 
are themselves established and undisputed, and 
which have a relation to the point to be proved. 
No satisfaction could ever be realized — no approach 
to truth and certainty could ever be made — by ad- 
vancing one disputed point to prove or establish 
another. In a court of justice the witnesses are 
called upon to state what they do know — what is, 
with them, clear and undisputed — that has a rela- 
tion to the question pending. In reasoning no ar- 
gument can be deemed valid, or as entitled to any 
importance whatever, unless it be itself drawn from 



296 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

facts and principles well established, and which 
have a relation to the point at issue. We can not, 
by the mere accumulation of doubtful or disputed 
arguments, add- any weight of certainty to the doc- 
trine which we would establish by them. To ad- 
vance one disputed fact to establish another, is but 
to shift the ground of the difficulty, not to diminish 
it. If the testimony itself can be overthrown, it 
proves nothing. All the proof that arises from any 
given fact, in any given case, is based on the single 
circumstance that the fact itself is unquestioned by 
the parties who are to be judges, remembering, of 
course, that it must have a proper relation to the 
point at issue. Now, suppose infant baptism and 
membership had been disputed topics in the early 
Christian Church; suppose, when Paul declared 
'your children are not unclean, but holy' — the pre- 
cise phraseology which a Jew would employ to 
assert their membership — that by this announce- 
ment he had touched a disputed point among the 
Corinthians; and suppose he had advanced — as he 
certainly does — the fact that these children were 
thus clean, or holy, [by which the Jewish disciples 
would understand that they were the converted 
seed, the lawful members of the Church,] to prove 
another point, I ask, would the argument have any 
weight whatever? If they had doubted that chil- 
dren themselves belonged to the Christian commu- 
nity, they certainly could not have received the 
assertion that they did thus belong as the proof of 
any other disputed point. They might very prop- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 297 

erly have said to the apostle, i True, your reason is 
very plausible and forcible to those who admit your 
premises. We readily grant that if children of be- 
lieving parents, or of those who have one parent a 
believer, and the other an unbeliever, do really be- 
long to the Christian community, then it must fol- 
low that the unbelieving was considered as ceremo- 
nially clean; but this reasoning takes for granted a 
disputed and unsettled point. We deny that chil- 
dren are members of the Christian community; and 
as your whole argument is built upon this mooted 
point — as it assumes for an action that which itself 
wants proof, at least in our estimation — it can, of 
course, with us, have no force whatever/ But no 
such reply was made to St. Paul. The fact on 
which his argument was based was too long and 
universally admitted. This passage, therefore, 
proves positively the continuation of the member- 
ship of children of believing parents, a privilege 
secured to them through all time by the Abra- 
hamic covenant. Having assumed this fact as the 
basis of his argument, that all children of believ- 
ing parents were holy in consequence of their con- 
secration to God, how natural to conclude that if 
pne of the parents believed even then the children 
should be holy; that is, consecrated to God! And 
having gained this point, how proper the next con- 
clusion at which he arrives; namely, that the be- 
lieving parent, securing this privilege to the chil- 
dren, should remain with the unbelieving, espe- 
cially when it could be done innocently and greatly 



298 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

to their benefit ! We think that we have thus ar- 
rived at the true and exact meaning of the apostle 
in the above passage ; and though infant baptism is 
not mentioned; yet the holy relation to God and the 
Church which children are said to sustain clearly 
implies it." 

II. Children are said to be "in the Lord/' or "in 
Christ/' in a sense which implies their Church 
membership, and, as a consequence, their baptism. 

1. The Church is called the body of Christ. 
"Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even 
the law of commandments contained in ordinances; 
for to make in himself of twain [Jews and Gentiles] 
one new man, so making peace; and that he might 
reconcile both [of the above parties] unto God in 
one body [Church] by the cross/' etc., Eph. ii, 15, 
16; "So we being many are one body in Christ, and 
every one members one of another/' etc., Romans 
xii, 5 ; " For we being many are one bread and one 
body," etc., 1 Cor. x, 17. 

2. All that are Christ's spiritually should be 
gathered into that "body," or Church. As has 
been already quoted, "We being many are one body 
in Christ," of course as "many" as are "in Christ" 
should belong to his "body;" and, as the apostle 
again says, it was from the beginning the "purpose " 
of God, "that in the dispensation of the fullness of 
time he might gather together in one [body] all 
things in Christ, [that is, that belong to Christ,] 
both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; 
even in him." 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 299 

3. " Little children" are ; in virtue of the atone- 
ment, "in Christ/' in the above sense, and, there- 
fore, should be visibly connected with his "body/' 
for "all things in Christ" are to be thus connected. 
If any person doubts whether little children are in 
Christ, let him read Ephesians vi, 1: "Children, 
obey your parents in the Lord; for this is right." 
These "children," though very young yet to re- 
ceive their training, or "bringing up" — see fourth 
verse — were, nevertheless, "in the Lord/' and as 
"all things in Christ" were to be gathered into 
"one body," these children were, undoubtedly, mem- 
bers of that body, just as " Adronicus " and "Junia," 
"Onesimus" and the "household of Narcissus," 
were "in the Lord," or "in Christ," and conse- 
quently members of his body. 

" But it must not escape attention how exactly 
the sequel of the apostle's address accords with the 
commencement; the injunction being given as to 
those in express covenant: ' Honor thy father and 
thy mother; for this is the first commandment with 
promise.' Had those addressed been out of the 
Christian pale this language would have been inap- 
plicable. In that case they would have been, art- 
rfk'ko't pitofisvov tys 7io%ft£i<xs niov lorpow^ — aliens from the 
commonwealth of Israel — therefore, not within the 
range of the Divine commandments; and tzvoi iw 
dtad^xcov tys £7tar/ysfaa$ — strangers from the covenant 
of promise — consequently, not warranted to assume 
an interest in the promise. As, then, the pressing 
of the sacred injunction supposes the persons on 



300 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

whom it is urged to be 6vii7to\i>tcki tw ayiw — -fellow- 
citizens with the saints — their acknowledged interest 
in the promise proves them to be ooxsioi tov deov — of 
the household of God. Eph. ii, 12." (Mr. Knox's 
Eemarks on Infant Baptism, at the end of Clarke's 
Commentary on Mark.) 

The promise the apostle is speaking of directly, 
is found in Exodus xx, 12 : " Honor thy father and 
thy mother : that thy clays may be long upon the 
land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." But 
this is not the first instance in which the Lord prom- 
ised a long life in the land of Canaan. Hence 
Moses refers directly, and St. Paul ultimately, to 
Genesis xvii, 8: "And I will give unto thee, and 
to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a 
stranger, all the land of Canaan for an everlasting 
possession; and I will be their God." This promise 
of the covenant Moses was subsequently divinely 
authorized especially to connect with the fifth com- 
mandment. And this promise, as we have previ- 
ously shown, had two parts; the land of Canaan as 
the immediate, and the heavenly Canaan as the 
ultimate portion of the faithful. Till children 
become proper subjects of the divine government, 
they are placed under the government of parents, 
specially charged with their religious training; and 
they are commanded to "honor" that government 
as the condition on which the covenant promise will 
be fulfilled, thereby showing that they were in a 
covenant relation. 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 301 

SECTION VIII. 

TESTIMONY OF THE IMMEDIATE SUCCESSORS OP THE APOSTLES. 

The practice of admitting the children of believ- 
ing parents into the Christian Church, authorized 
by the Abraharnic covenant, and again sanctioned 
by the apostles' commission, was continued as a uni- 
versal custom in the Church for the first eleven hun- 
dred years. 

What amount of reliance should be placed upon 
the testimony of the early Christian fathers? It 
must be admitted, that while the apostles were yet 
living, various errors began to make their appear- 
ance, which, in process of time, became destructive 
of the vital interests of Christianity. And the best, 
and wisest, and most influential men of that period 
show, by their writings, that they were seriously 
tinctured with those errors; so that it is very un- 
safe to rely upon the traditions of the early Chris- 
tians on points of faith, or in relation to religious 
forms or ceremonies. But whatever may have been 
the peculiar errors of these times, men who will- 
ingly sacrificed their lives in vindicating the Gos- 
pel, are certainly competent witnesses when they 
attempt merely to state facts, or to narrate customs 
then universally prevalent, about which they claim 
to have personal knowledge. 

Mr. Campbell says, " Though no article of Chris- 
tian faith, nor item of Christian practice, can, legit- 
imately, rest upon any testimony, reasoning, or 



302 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

authority, out of the sacred writings of the apostles, 
were it only one day after their decease, yet the 
views and practices of those who were the cotem- 
poraries, or the pupils of the apostles and their im- 
mediate successors, may be adduced as corroborating 
evidence of the truths taught, and the practices en- 
joined by the apostles, and, as such, may be cited; 
still bearing in mind that where the testimony of 
the apostles ends, Christian faith necessarily term- 
inates." 

Bishop Onderdonk of Pennsylvania, in his charge 
to his clergy, says: "If there be an absolutely-un- 
questioned tradition, clearly traceable to the apos- 
tolic age, the matter of which is asserted in Scrip- 
ture also, the authority in the case must be accounted 
twofold; that of the written word, however, being, 
from its nature, the more excellent of the two." 

"This, then, is the nature of the agreement we 
propose to consider in this chapter. We adduce 
the testimony of the Christian fathers, and early 
councils, to prove the fact of the antiquity of infant 
baptism; and having fixed the date of the practice 
coeval with the times of the apostles, we then ad- 
vance from this ascertained fact to the argument; 
namely, if it was handed down to us from the time 
of the apostles, all the circumstances of the case 
combine to prove that it was delivered to the first 
Churches by apostolic authority." (Hibbard on In- 
fant Baptism, p. 182.) 

For the twofold purpose of illustrating and of 
proving what we have said concerning the ancient 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 303 

fathers, we here introduce the testimony of Dr. 
Gregory: "Baptism," says the Doctor, "was per- 
formed in the second century publicly twice a year. 
The catechumens, or probationers for baptism, 
assembled in the Church on the great festivals of 
Easter and Whitsuntide; and after a public decla- 
ration of their faith, and a solemn assurance from 
their sponsors that it was their intention to live con- 
formably to the Gospel, they received the sacrament 
of baptism. This rite was performed by three im- 
mersions, and the body was divested of clothes. In 
order to preserve decency in the operation, the bap- 
tismal font of the women was separated from that 
of the men, and they were as much as possible 
attended by the deaconesses of the Church. Bap- 
tism by aspersion was permitted to the sick, and in 
cases where a sufficient quantity of water for im- 
mersion could not be procured. The sign of the 
cross was made use of in this rite; and a solemn 
prayer was uttered on consecrating the baptismal 
water. Confirmation immediately succeeded the 
performance of this rite." (Bingham's Ecc. Antiq., 
p. 121.) 

"The earliest and most express records testify 
that infant baptism was usual in the Church. Par- 
ents were originally sponsors for their infant chil- 
dren; and one sponsor was the same with that of 
the person baptized; but in infants no respect was 
paid to this circumstance." (Ibid, XI, 8. See 
Gregory and Ruter's Church History, p. 53.) 

By the above statement of facts, it will be seen, 



304 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

that, even in the second century, various supersti- 
tious appendages were connected with baptism, for 
the purpose of rendering it more efficacious; the 
Church in that day being generally inclined to place 
entirely too much stress upon ordinances as means 
of salvation. Hence, they baptized mostly by im- 
mersion, and repeated the ordinance three times, 
applying the cross, and required the candidate to be 
naked, etc. But great as was their departure from 
the simple truth of the Gospel, in these respects, 
they, at least, prove conclusively that infant baptism 
was generally practiced among them. Whether this 
was a superstitious appendage also, the reader must 
determine from other evidences. No serious inno- 
vation has ever been made in either the doctrine or 
the economy of the Church, without exciting at 
least sufficient controversy to enable the subsequent 
historian to fix not only its date, but also the cir- 
cumstances that led to it, as well as to detect the 
innovators. But infant baptism, if an innovation, 
is an exception; for no trace can be found of the 
time when it was commenced, or the circumstances 
which led to its introduction, or yet to the persons 
who effected so important a change in the economy 
of the Church of Christ. Each individual of im- 
portance, from St. John down, gives some evidence 
of its existence in his day, but no evidence that it 
was then commenced. 

The following statements, made by Mr. Campbell, 
are important admissions in some respects, though 
not quite true in others He says: "To discredit 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 305 

the testimony of these venerahle ancients, as they 
are called, my friend alleges their opinions on other 
matters, showing how whimsical they were in some 
things. Grant it; and what then? Does any 
man's private opinion discredit his testimony on any 
question of fact? If so, how do we receive the ca- 
nonical books of the New Testament? Upon the 
very testimony here adduced, so far as regards hu- 
man testimony at all. Andrew [his opponent] does 
not know where his imputations terminate. But he 
admits them to be competent witnesses of facts, and 
would take them out of our hands by his question, 
'When Origen testifies that infants were baptized 
for the remission of sins, does he not as clearly tes- 
tify that infants were baptized, as that they were 
baptized for the remission of sins?' I say, yes; and 
who says, no? And have I not always admitted 
that, in Origen 7 s time, infants were immersed? 
Have I not affirmed, upon the testimony of Tertul- 
lian and Origen, that in Tertullian's time, infants, 
in some cases, began to be immersed?" (Debate 
between Campbell and Rice, p. 417.) 

Mr. Campbell admits that infants were baptized 
in the time of Origen and Tertullian, the close of 
the second and beginning of the third centuries; 
but neither he nor any one else can prove that it 
was commenced then. 

1. Justin Martyr, of whom Dr. Gregory makes 
the following just remarks: "This eminent person 
was born at Sichem, in Palestine; and after wan- 
dering in pursuit of truth through every known 
20 



306 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

philosophical system, he at length embraced Chris- 
tianity, and, without laying aside his philosopher's 
habit, taught the doctrines of the Gospel at Rome/' 
He was born A. D. 103 ; converted to Christ A. D. 
133; wrote, as is supposed, about forty years after 
the death of St. John. 

Justin says, "We also, who by him have had ac- 
cess to God, have not received this carnal circum- 
cision, but the spiritual circumcision, which Enoch, 
and those like him, observed. And we have re- 
ceived it by baptism, by the mercy of God, because 
we were sinners; and it is enjoined tfpon all per- 
sons to receive it in the same way." Again: "We 
are circumcised by baptism with Christ's circum- 
cision." (Dialogue with Trypho.) And again: 
"Many persons among us, of sixty and seventy 
years old, of both sexes, who were [^fiad^tsvOsaav] 
discipled to Christ in their childhood, [sx rfcufoov,] 
do continue uncorrupted." (Apologia Prima.) 

(1.) The first thing that strikes the attention of 
the reader in the above quotation, is the fact that 
Justin evidently substitutes "baptism" for "carnal 
circumcision," and that he employs both as types 
of spiritual regeneration. As Dr. Wall, speaking 
of this language of Justin, and of St. Paul's lan- 
guage in Col. ii, 11, 12, says, that in both places 
circumcision "refers both to the inward and outward 
part of baptism," and consequently the ancients were 
accustomed to call baptism "the circumcision made 
without hands," because it typified the inward work 
of grace upon the heart. And if the primitive 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 307 

Christians believed that baptism took the place of 
circumcision literally and typically then they must 
have believed in, and practiced, infant baptism; 
for infants were certainly circumcised previously to 
the change. It must be remembered, also, that 
Trypho was a Jew, and that Justin was showing 
him the reason why Christians were not circum- 
cised. They had a "spiritual circumcision," which, 
though not made with human "hands," was every way 
superior, and that "spiritual circumcision" was typi- 
fied by baptism. Would not Trypho, or any other 
Jew, infer from such language that while Christians, 
for the above reasons, refused to circumcise their 
children as formerly they now baptize them ? This 
inference would certainly be legitimate. 

(2.) Justin says that "many persons among us, 
of sixty and seventy years old, of both sexes, who 
were [sfiaOyjtzvOsaav'] discipled to Christ in their [zx 
rta^wv] childhood, do continue uncorrupted." 

First. To disciple implies baptism. "Go ye and 
disciple all nations, baptizing them," etc. Although 
to be discipled implies, in the case of adults, espe- 
cially, something more than baptism, yet no person, 
adult or infant, can, in the full Scriptural sense, be 
a disciple till baptized. 

Mr. Campbell, speaking of the apostles' commis- 
sion, says, "The construction of the sentence fairly 
indicates that no person can be a disciple, accord- 
ing to the commission, who has not been immersed, 
[baptized;] for the active participle, in connection 
with an imperative, either declares the manner in 



308 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

which the imperative shall he obeyed, or explains the 
meaning of the command." (Chris. System, p. 189.) 

We do not indorse Mr. Campbell to the full ex- 
tent of his evident meaning in the above remarks. 
An adult may be pardoned or regenerated without 
baptism, but without this ordinance he can not pos- 
sess the true visible badge of discipleship. These 
persons, therefore, having been — E^aO^EvOsaav — dis- 
cipled to Christ in their childhood, were evidently 
baptized unto Christ in their childhood. And by 
s x rtcuScov — childhood — he must refer to the innocency 
of childhood; for they do continue uncorrupted — 
a clear intimation that they were discipled before 
they became defiled with personal sin; and, by the 
blessing of God, having been " trained up in the 
way they should go/' they had never " departed 
from it" — they "do continue uncorrupted." 

Seconal. These persons that had been "discipled 
to Christ in their childhood," were, at thje time Jus- 
tin wrote, "sixty or seventy years old." Now, in- 
asmuch as Justin wrote about forty years after the 
death of St. John, they must have been " discipled 
to Christ" as much as twenty or thirty years before 
the death of that apostle, and several years before 
the death of St. Paul. These persons were disci- 
pled, therefore, by the apostles themselves; and as 
the Savior commanded them to baptize all they dis- 
cipled, just so certain as the apostles obeyed his 
command in making disciples, so certain is it that 
these persons were baptized by the apostles in child- 
hood. 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 309 

2. Ireneus, who was born about the time of St. 
John's death, and was the disciple of Poly carp, and 
Bishop of Lyons, in France, wrote about seventy 
years after the death of the apostles. The follow- 
ing statement, made by himself, will show his supe- 
rior opportunities for obtaining and transmitting a 
correct knowledge of apostolic usages : 

"I remember," said he, "the things that were 
done then better than I do those of later times, so 
that I could describe the place where he [Poly- 
carp] sat, and his going out and coming in; his 
manner of life, his features, his discourse to the 
people concerning the conversation he had with 
[the apostle] John, and others that had seen the 
Lord; how he rehearsed their discourses, and what 
he had heard them that were eye-witnesses of the 
word of life say of their Lord, and of his miracles 
and doctrine, all agreeable to the Scriptures." 
(Wall's History of Infant Baptism, p. 21.) 

On the subject we are now discussing, Ireneus 
says of Christ, " Therefore, as he was a Master, he 
had also the age of a master. Not disdaining, nor 
going in a way above human nature, nor breaking, 
in his own person, the law which he had set for 
mankind; but sanctifying every several age by the 
likeness that it has to him ; for he came to save all 
persons by himself — all, I mean, who by him are re- 
generated [baptized] unto God, infants and little 
ones, children and youths, and elder persons. 
Therefore, he went through the several ages; for 
infants being made an infant, sanctifying infants; 



310 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

to little ones he was made a little one, sanctifying 
those of that age, and also giving them an example 
of godliness, justice, and dutifulness; to youths he 
was a youth/' etc. (Wall's History of Infant Bap- 
tism, Vol. I, p. 72.) 

The only point in dispute relating to the above 
quotations, is the meaning of the phrase regenerated 
unto God; but it will not be a difficult task to prove 
that the Christian fathers used this phrase to de- 
scribe baptism. 

Mr. Campbell, whose testimony will not be inap- 
propriate here, says that u all the apostolical fathers, 
as they are called, all the pupils of the apostles, and 
all the ecclesiastical writers of note, of the first four 
Christian centuries, whose writings have come down 
to us, allude to, and speak of, Christian immersion 
[meaning Christian baptism] as the 'regeneration' 
and c remission of sins ' spoken of in the New Test- 
ament" (Christian System, p. 218.) 

Again : u On a more accurate and strict examina- 
tion of their writings, and of the use of this term in 
the New Testament, I am assured that they used the 
term regenerated as equivalent to immersion, [bap- 
tism,] and spoke of the spiritual change under other 
terms and modes of speech," etc. (Millen. Harb., Yol. 
II, Extra, p. 29.) 

It is due Mr. Campbell to say that the above re- 
marks were penned in an effort to prove baptismal 
regeneration, not thinking, perhaps, that it was 
yielding a very important point in favor of infant 
baptism. 



RIGHT TO THE COYENANT TOKEN. 311 

Dr. Wall says, " The Christians did, in all ancient 
times, continue the use of this name 'regeneration* 
for baptism; so that they never use the word 'regen- 
erate] or 'born again] but they mean or denote by 
it baptism" (Fourth London Edition, p. 116, Vol. 
1, 1829.) 

The following, with many more, are given by 
Wall as instances corroborating the above fact : 
" Justin Martyr, showing how Christian disciples 
were made, in his first Apology, says, 'We bring 
them to some place where there is water, xao tportov 
avay£vvi]<3£co$ 6v xao 7}(A£L$ avtoi av£y£vv^9?jfi£v, avay£vi^iov- 
tat — and they are regenerated by the same way of re- 
generation by which we were regenerated — for they 
are washed with water in the name of God the Fa- 
ther, and Lord of all things, and of our Savior, Jesus 
Christ, and of the Holy Spirit; for Christ says, 
u Except ye be regenerated, you can not enter into 
the kingdom of heaven." . . . And that we shall 
obtain forgiveness of the sins in which we have 
lived, by or in water, there is invoked over him that 
has a mind to be regenerated, the name of God, the 
Father, and Lord of all things; . . . and this wash- 
ing is called the enlightening/ etc. 

"Ireneus says, 'When Christ gave to his apostles 
the commission of regenerating unto God, he said 
unto them, "Go and teach all nations, baptizing 
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Spirit." ' 

"Gregory Nazianzen, exhorting persons that had 
been baptized not to fall into sin again, says, 'Ovx 



312 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

ovcf?]$ Ssvtspus avayswyGstos, there is not another regen- 
eration afterward to be had, though it be sought 
with never so inuclf crying and tears/ while he ad- 
mits that repentance and forgiveness may be expe- 
rienced even after baptism. It is, therefore, only 
baptism that can not be repeated. 

"St. Austin, in answer to the inquiry whether 
carrying a baptized child to a heathen sacrifice would 
destroy the benefit derived from baptism, says, "An 
infant does never lose the grace of Christ, which 
he has once received, but by his own sinful deeds, 
if, when he grows up, he proves so wicked; for then 
he will begin to have sins of his own, quae non re- 
generatione auferantur, sed alia curatione sanentur, 
which are not removed by regeneration, [baptism,] 
but will be healed by some other method/ 
"St. Hierom says that 'Christ was born of a vir- 
gin, and regenerated by a virgin/ referring in the 
last instance to John the Baptist, who was unmar- 
ried." (Wall's History of Infant Baptism, Part I, 
Chap. II, Sec. IV, V, and Chap. Ill, IV.) 

The above are sufficient to show, I think, the 
sense in which Ireneus used the term "regenerated 
unto God;" and fully justifies us in saying that he 
meant "all who by him are baptized unto God, 
infants and little ones," etc. 

"Now, the question is, had Ireneus the opportu- 
nity to know the fact concerning which he testifies ? 
For let it be distinctly understood, we appeal to the 
ancient Christian fathers, not for their opinions on 
theology — from these we honestly dissent — but, as 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 313 

Dr. Rice says, c I call them up as witnesses to a mat- 
ter of fact; namely, that in their clay, and, so far 
as they knew, to the days of the apostles, the bap- 
tism of infants was universally practiced. y The indi- 
rect, yet clear testimony of Ireneus, so near the 
apostle John, goes very far indeed to prove not only 
that it was generally practiced, but that it was of 
Divine authority." (Debate between Campbell and 
Rice, p. 389.) 

3. Tertullian, of whom Dr. Gregory says, he 
" lived in the latter end of* the second and the be- 
ginning of the third century. He was by birth a 
Carthaginian, and possessed all the constitutional 
fervor natural to the sons of the warm climate of 
Africa. Disgusted with some affronts he had met 
with from the ecclesiastics at Rome, and incited by 
his own vehement and rigid disposition, he em- 
braced the opinions of Montanus, and attacked his 
adversaries with rather more warmth of temper than 
strength of argument. He was, however, learned, 
acute, and ingenious, but severe, enthusiastical, and 
rather credulous." (Gregory and Ruter's Church 
History, p. 61.) 

Tertullian was opposed to infant baptism. He 
says : "But they whose duty it is to administer bap- 
tism, are to know that it is not to be given rashly. 
Give to every one that asketli thee, has its proper 
subject, and relates to almsgiving; but that com- 
mand rather is here to be considered, Give not that 
which is holy to dogs, neither cast your pearls before 
swine j and that, Lay hands suddenly on no man, 



314 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

neither he partakers of other men's faults. . . . 
Therefore, according to everyone's condition and dis- 
position, and also their age, the delaying of baptism 
is more profitable, especially in the case of little 
children. For what need is there that the god- 
fathers should be brought into danger? because 
they may either fail of their promises by death, or 
they may be mistaken by a child proving of a wicked 
disposition. Our Lord says, indeed, 'Do not forbid 
them to come to me/ Therefore, let them come 
when they are grown up; let them come when they 
understand; when they are instructed whither it is 
they come; let them be made Christians when they 
know Christ. What need their guiltless age make 
such haste to the forgiveness of sins? Men will 
proceed more warily in worldly things; and he that 
should not have earthly goods committed to him, 
yet shall he have heavenly? Let them know how 
to desire this salvation, that you may appear to have 
given to one that asketh. For no less reason un- 
married persons ought to be kept off, who are likely 
to come into temptation, as well as those that were 
never married, upon account of their coming to ripe- 
ness, as those in widowhood, for the miss of their 
partner, till they either marry or be confirmed in 
continence. They that understand the weight of 
baptism, will rather dread the receiving it than the 
delaying of it. An entire faith is secure of salva- 
tion.^ (Wall, Vol. I, pp. 93, 94.) 

Now, notwithstanding Tertullian wrote against 
infant baptism, yet, as Mr. Hibbard says, a The 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 315 

simple fact that lie speaks of infant baptism as a 
well-known and general practice in his day, proves 
it to have been instituted long before his day. If 
Tertullian opposed infant baptism, then it is incon- 
testable that infant baptism existed* This is the 
best kind of proof we could possibly have. But if 
the practice of infant baptism existed before the 
days of Tertullian, that is, within less than one 
hundred years after the death of the apostle John, 
when, we ask, did it commence, and with whom did 
it originate ? Can our opponents tell us ? Could 
such a practice, which affects — in the estimation of 
our opponents, at least — the essential character of 
the ordinance, as well as that of the Church, could 
such, a practice, I say, originate in merely-human 
authority, and become general over Europe, western 
Asia, and northern and eastern Africa, within less 
than a single century after the apostles, and yet its 
novelty not be objected to by one who opposed the 
practice ? Tertullian was, as we have seen, oppos- 
ing, under certain circumstances, infant baptism. 
Now, whatever would make for his argument, we 
know he would have had no scruples in using. 
Many fitful and puerile things we know he did say, 
for want of better material to work with. Could he 
have found more powerful and plausible weapons at 
hand, unquestionably he would have used them. 
Suppose, then, infant baptism had been an. inven- 
tion of some doctor or doctors in the Church since 
the days of St. John, such a circumstance, had it 
been true, could not have escaped the knowledge of 



316 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

such a man as Tertullian, and had he been know- 
ing to such a fact, he certainly would not have failed 
to urge it. Why, then, did he not come out at 
once, and say, * First of all, this doctrine of infant 
baptism is a novel thing, and without any authority 
whatever from Christ and his apostles; therefore, 
it ought to be abandoned, and baptism deferred to 
adult age V Why, I say, did he not urge its nov- 
elty, and its utter want of Scriptural authority, 
against its being practiced ? Why did he not point 
out the innovator who first introduced the custom, 
and brand him as a heretic ? All this would have 
been directly to his purpose, and would have 
weighed a thousand times more in argument than 
the contemptible puerilities over which he makes a 
pitiful display of reasoning. Why, then, did he 
not use these important facts — why ? To this there 
can be but one answer; because no such facts ex- 
isted in truth; because infant baptism bore a date 
and an authority coeval and coequal to the date and 
authority of adult Christian baptism." (Hibbard 
on Infant Baptism, pp. 191, 192.) 

But as Tertullian is relied upon, and often quoted, 
by anti-pedobaptists, let us examine a little further 
the principles on which his opposition was based. 
"His opposition to it rested, primarily, on the 
ground that it was better to defer baptism, in all 
cases, till just before death, or till the individual 
was beyond the reach of peculiar temptation; and 
this notion arose out of the prevailing belief that 
baptism washed away ail previous guilt, and not from 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 317 

any objection to infant baptism per sc. This made 
sin, after baptism, appear to them the more terrible, 
inasmuch as the ordinance could not be repeated. 
On the same principle, Tertullian advises all single 
persons, widows, etc., to defer baptism till they are 
either married or confirmed in continence, lest they, 
being exposed to temptation, should fall into sin 
c They that understand the weight of baptism/ says 
he, 'will rather dread the receiving it than the de- 
laying it/ In this connection he is not speaking 
of infant baptism exclusively, nor of the delay of 
infant baptism only, but of the delay of baptism in 
all cases where there is no immediate expectation of 
death, and where there is any peculiar danger from 
temptation. Hear him : i Therefore, according to 
every one's condition and disposition, and also their 
age, the delaying of baptism is more profitable! 
But where there is an approach of death, or a case 
of necessity, he strongly advocates even lay-baptism, 
and says if a person 'neglects at such a time to do 
what he lawfully may, [that is, to baptize, or to dis- 
charge the office of a bishop toward the person in 
necessity,] he will be guilty of the person's perdi- 
tion/ From this view, then, of Tertullian' s pe- 
culiar notions respecting the ordinance of baptism, 
the character of his far-famed opposition to infant 
baptism assumes quite another aspect/' (Hibbard 
on Infant Baptism, pp. 192, 193.) 

But the reader must remember that we did not 
quote Tertullian to show the character of his the- 
ology, but merely for the purpose of showing that 



318 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

infant baptism was generally practiced in the Church 
in his day; and his feeble and irrelevant arguments 
against infant baptism prove it as fully, and even 
more so, than if they had been employed in its 
favor. The skeptical writings that were sent forth 
during the first centuries against Jesus Christ and 
his apostles, are now invaluable documents to prove 
the antiquity of Christianity; and modern infidels 
can dispose of the testimony of all the Christian 
fathers easier than they can one of these; for 
Christ and his apostles must have lived before these 
enemies wrote, or else how could they have had any 
knowledge of them ? And so infant baptism must 
have been prevalent in the Church before Tertul- 
lian's day, or else how came he to oppose it, or to 
know any thing about it ? And as he lived so near 
the apostles, and was so well informed, if it had 
been started during the interval he certainly would 
have made that fact known to the world. 

4. Origen, who lived and wrote during the early 
part of the third century. " His attention to the 
sacred Scriptures was early and indefatigable; but 
though the principal, they were not the only objects 
of his studies; he was conversant in philosophy and 
polite literature, published several doctrinal and 
moral treatises, and entered the field of controversy 
with vigor and success. The number of his literary 
performances exceeds that of any other Christian 
writer in the early ages, and is, indeed, very consid- 
erable." (Gregory and Ruter's History of the 
Church, p. 78.) 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 319 

In his homily on Leviticus, Origen says, "Hear 
David speaking: 'I was/ says he, 'conceived in in- 
iquity, and in sin did my mother bring me forth ;' 
showing that every soul that is born in the flesh is 
polluted with the filth of sin and iniquity, and that, 
therefore, that was said, which we mentioned be- 
fore, that none is clear from pollution, though his life 
he but the lengtli of one day. Besides all this, let it 
be considered what is the reason that, whereas, the 
baptism of the Church is given for the forgiveness of 
sins , infants also are, by the usage of the Church, 
baptized, when, if there were nothing in infants 
that wanted forgiveness and mercy, the grace of 
baptism would be needless to them." 

In the above quotation, you see that it was the 
doctrine of original sin, especially in infants, that 
he was laboring to prove. How far his theology 
was defective, or how irrelevant the argument may 
have been, is not the question. He certainly labors 
to prove that infants are guilty, and need forgive- 
ness; from the fact that "the baptism of the Church 
is given for the forgiveness of sins, infants also are, 
by the usage of the Church, baptized." Now, no 
approach to truth could be made by advancing one 
disputed point to prove another: hence, we infer, 
not only from the language employed, but from the 
manner in which infant baptism is introduced in 
the argument, that it was the universal practice of 
the Church in his day to baptize hey infant mem- 
bers. 

Again : in his homily on Luke, Origen says, " Hav- 



820 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

ing occasion given in this place, I will mention a 
tiling that causes frequent inquiries among the 
brethren. Infants are baptized for the forgiveness 
of sins. Of what sins? or when have they sinned? 
or how can any reason of the law, in their case, 
hold good but according to that sense we mentioned 
even now — none are free from pollution, though his 
life be of but the length of one day upon the earth ? 
And it is for that reason, because by the sacrament 
of baptism the pollution of our birth is taken away, 
that infants are baptized." 

Again: in his homily on Romans, he says, "For 
this, also, it was that the Church had from the apos- 
tles a tradition [or order] to give baptism even to 
infants; for they to whom the Divine mysteries were 
committed knew that there is in all persons the 
natural pollution of sins, which must be done away 
by water and the Spirit, by reason of which the 
body itself is called the body of sin." (Wall, Vol. 
I, pp. 104, 105, 106.) 

Here it is expressly said that the " Church" re- 
ceived u infant baptism" from the " apostles;" and 
considering the opportunities of this witness to 
know the truth, his great intelligence, and his prox- 
imity to the apostles, he puts the subject beyond a 
reasonable doubt. The Church did, in his day, 
generally baptize her infant children ; and she re- 
ceived authority to do so from the apostles. 

5. Cyprian, Fidus,* and the Council of sixty-six 
Bishops, assembled A. D. 253. " Cyprian," says 
Dr. Gregory, "who, in the year 248, attained to the 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 321 

Episcopal See of Carthage, acquired a degree of 
admiration and applause from his cotemporaries, 
which has not been denied to him by posterity. 
Affable, virtuous, and charitable in his private char- 
acter, he was zealous, spirited, and active in his 
public station, and possessed all those qualities 
which are calculated to attach friends and excite 
the jealousy of adversaries." (Gregory and Ruter's 
Church History, p. 80.) 

A council of bishops to the number of sixty-six 
was convened at Carthage in 253, to which Fidus, a 
country bishop, addressed a letter, soliciting their 
opinion in relation to the propriety of baptizing 
children till they were eight days old, and giving it 
as his opinion that their baptism should be deferred 
till the age in which it was originally lawful to cir- 
cumcise them. The following is their answer : 

" Cyprian, and the rest of the bishops who are 
present at the Council, in number sixty-six, to Fi- 
dus, our brother, greeting : 

" We read your letter, most esteemed brother, in 
which you write of one Victor, a priest, etc. . . . 
But to the case of infants; whereas, you judge 
i that they must not be baptized within two or three 
days after they are born, and that the rule of cir- 
cumcision is to be observed, so that none should be 
baptized and sanctified before the eighth day after 
he is born/ we were all in our assembly oe a 
contrary opinion; for as for what you thought 
fitting to be done, there was not one that was of 
your mind, but all of us, on the contrary, judged 
21 



322 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

that the grace and mercy of God is to be denied to 
no person that is born; for, whereas, our Lord, in 
his Gospel, says, 'The Son of man came not to de- 
stroy men's souls, [or lives,] but to save them/ as 
far as lies in us, no soul, if possible, is to be lost. . . 
So that we judge that no person is to be hindered 
from obtaining the grace by the law that is now ap- 
pointed; and that the spiritual circumcision [that 
is, the grace of baptism'] ought not to be impeded 
by the circumcision that was according to the flesh, 
[that is, Jewish circumcision ;] but that all are to 
be admitted to the grace of Christ, since Peter, 
speaking in the Acts of the Apostles, says, 'The 
Lord has shown me that no person is to be called 
common or unclean/ If any thing could be an 
obstacle to persons against their obtaining the 
grace, the adult, and grown, and aged, would be 
rather hindered by their more grievous sins. If, 
then, the greatest offenders, and those that have 
grievously sinned against God before, have, when 
they afterward come to believe, forgiveness of their 
sins, and no person is prohibited from baptism and 
grace, how much less reason is there to refuse an 
infant who, being newly born, has no sin, save that 
being descended from Adam according to the flesh, 
he has from his very birth contracted the contagion 
of the death anciently threatened, who comes, for 
this reason, more easily to receive forgiveness of 
sins, because they are not his own but other's sins 
that are forgiven him." (Cyprian's Epistle to Fi- 
dus, in Wall, Vol. I, p. 129.) 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 323 

(1.) The question in dispute, as the reader will 
see, was not whether infants were to be baptized, 
for even Ficlus did not dispute this fact, but were 
they, in extreme cases, to be baptized earlier than 
eight days after birth ? 

(2.) The answer of these sixty-six bishops, with 
Cyprian for their scribe, unanimously agree that 
they were fit for, yea, entitled to baptism at any 
time after they were born. 

The reader will see, in the above epistle, evidence 
of a fact of which we apprised him at the commence- 
ment of this section; namely, that the Christian 
fathers generally fell into error in laying too much 
stress upon Christian baptism as a means of forgiv- 
ing sin; but this does not injure the testimony 
when unitedly given, as in the above instance, of 
men of the best means of knowing the truth, as- 
sembled from different and distant portions of the 
Church, concerning what was, and had ever been, 
the custom of the Church in relation to the baptism 
of infant children. 

Dr. Milner says, "Here is an assembly of sixty- 
six pastors, men of approved fidelity and gravity, 
who have stood the fiery trial of some of the sever- 
est persecutions ever known, and who have testified 
their love to the Lord Jesus Christ in a more strik- 
ing manner than any anti-pedobaptists have had an 
opportunity of doing in our days; and if we may 
judge of their religious views by those of Cyprian — 
and they are all in perfect harmony with him — they 
are not wanting in any fundamental of godliness. 



324 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

No man, in any age, more reverenced the Scriptures, 
and made more copious use of them on all occasions 
than he did; and, it must be confessed, in the very 
best manner. For he uses them continually for 
practice, not for ostentation; for use, not for 
sake of victory in argument. Before this holy 
assembly a question is brought, not whether infants 
should be baptized at all — none contradicted this — 
but whether it is right to baptize them immediately 
or on the eighth day. Without a single negative 
they all determined to baptize them immediately. 
This transaction passed in the year two hundred and 
fifty-three. Let the reader consider, if infant bap- 
tism had been an innovation, it must have been now 
of a considerable standing. The disputes concern- 
ing Easter, and other very uninteresting points, 
show that sucn an innovation must have formed a 
remarkable era in the Church. The number of her- 
esies and divisions had been very great. Among 
them all. such a deviation from apostolic practice 
as this must have been remarked. To me it ap- 
pears impossible to account for this state of things, 
but on the footing that it had ever been allowed; 
and, therefore, that it was the custom of the first 
Churches." (History of the Church, Cent. 3, 
Chap. XIII.) 

This opinion we fully indorse. 

6. Oplatus, Bishop of Melevi, of considerable 
note in the Church, who wrote about A. D. 370, 
makes the following novel but interesting remarks, 
in relation to "putting on Christ" by Christian bap- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 325 

tisrn, and wearing him as a garment: "But lest any 
one should say I speak irreverently in calling Christ 
a garment, let him read what the apostle says : ' As 
many of you as have been baptized in the name of 
Christ, have put on Christ/ what a garment is 
this, that is always one, and never renewed; that 
decently fits all ages and all forms ! It is neither 
plaited for infants nor stretched for men, and, with- 
out altering, is suitable to women ¥' (Fifth Book 
Concerning the Schism of the Donatists.) 

7. Gregory Nazianzen, who was bishop success- 
ively of Sasimi, Nazianzus, and Constantinople, 
wrote about A. D. 380 as follows : 

"Art thou a youth? fight against pleasures and 
passions with this auxiliary strength; list thyself 
in God's army. Art thou old? let thy gray hairs 
hasten thee; strengthen thy age with baptism. . . . 
Hast thou an infant child? let not wickedness 
have the advantage of time; let him be sanctified 
from his infancy; let him be dedicated from his 
cradle in the spirit. Thou as a faint-hearted mother, 
and of little faith, art afraid of giving him the seal, 
[that is, baptism,] because of the weakness of na- 
ture. Hannah, before Samuel was born, devoted 
him to God, and as soon as he was born consecrated 
him, and brought him up from the first in a priestly 
garment, not fearing on account of human infirm- 
ities, but trusting in God. Thou hast no need of 
amulets, or charms. . . . Give to him the Trinity, 
that great and excellent preservative. Ao$ avtu n^v 

tfptaSa, 'to iisya xao xaXov (pvhaxit'qpiov. 



326 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Again : u Some of them live like beasts, and re- 
gard not baptism. Some have a value for baptism, 
but delay the receiving it, either out of negligence 
or a greediness longer to enjoy their lusts. But 
some others have it not in their own power to re- 
ceive it, either because of their infancy, perhaps, 
\yi hux vTjTiiot^-taTfvyovj] or, by reason of some accident, 
utterly involuntary. . . . And I think of the first 
sort, [that is, those who despise baptism,] that they 
shall be punished, as for their other wickedness, so 
for their slighting of baptism; and that the sec- 
ond shall be punished, but in a less degree, because 
they are guilty of their own missing it, but rather 
through folly than malice; but that the last sort 
[those who omit baptism involuntary, as infants] 
will neither be glorified nor punished by the just 
Judge, as being without the seal, [that is, baptism,] 
but not through their own wickedness, and as hav- 
ing suffered the loss rather than occasioned it." 
"We must, therefore, make it our utmost care that 
we do not miss of the common grace," etc. " Some 
may say, Suppose this to hold in the case of those 
who can desire baptism, what say you of those that 
are yet infants, and are not in capacity to be sensible 
either of the grace or the want of it, shall we bap- 
tize them too? Yes, by all means, if any danger 
make it requisite. For it is better that they be 
sanctified without their own sense of it, than that 
they should be unsealed and uninitiated. Ka& tovtov 
Tioyoj r^/Liv t] oxTfcf^fjispo^ Ttspnfofiy], a.nd our reason for this 
is circumcision, which was performed on the eighth 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 327 

day, and was a tj^pical seal, and was practiced on 
those who had no use of reason. As for others, I 
give my opinion that they should stay three years, 
or thereabouts, when they are able to hear and an- 
swer some holy words ; and though they do not per- 
fectly understand them, yet they form them ; ovtut 

and that you then sanctify them in soul and body with 
the great sacrament of consecration" (Discourse on 
Baptism.) 

Gregory and Tertullian, as the reader will have 
observed, are the only persons we have yet found 
who even advised a delay of infant baptism, and 
that only when there was no immediate danger. 
And this very advice shows how very prevalent 
infant baptism was in their day. 

8. Ambrose, who was a native of Graul, and was 
elected bishop of Milan in A. D. 374, and became 
a writer of some note. He says: "But perhaps 
this may seem to be fulfilled in our time, and in the 
apostles' time. For that returning of the river 
waters backward toward the spring-head, which was 
caused by Elias when the river was divided, [as the 
Scripture says, Jordan ivas driven back,~] signified 
the sacrament of the laver of salvation, which was 
afterward to be instituted; per quae in primordia 
naturae, suae qui baptizati fuerint, parvuli a malitia 
reformantu, by which those infants who have been bap- 
tized are reformed from perverseness to the primitive 
state of their nature" (Comment on Luke i, 17.) 

Other quotations equally to our purpose might be 



328 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

made from this father if necessary, to show his 
opinion as to whether infants were baptized in his 
day. In the above he clearly intimates that they 
were, as well as in the apostles' time. " Fulfilled 
in our time/' he says, "and in the apostles' time." 

9. Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, a man 
of great eloquence, about the close of the third 
century, says : " But our circumcision — I mean the 
grace of baptism — gives cure without pain, and pro- 
cures to us a thousand benefits, and fills us with the 
grace of the Spirit; and it had no determinate time 
as that had, out one in immature age, or in middle 
life, or that is in old age, may receive this circum- 
cision without hands, in which there is no trouble 
to be undergone." (Homily XI on Genesis.) 

Again : St. Austin quotes from a work of his now 

lost, the following: "Am* tovto xac *a Tiavdoa parttfMy- 
o/jlev xanfoo a^aptf^ fisTfa fX7j szovta, for this reason we 
baptize infants also, although they have no sins" 



SECTION IX. 

HISTORICAL ARGUMENT CONTINUED. 

We will now strengthen the testimony already 
adduced from the Christian fathers, by the following 
additional quotations: 

10. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, "was or- 
dained coadjutor to Valerius in 395. . . . His 
works, which are more numerous than any other 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 329 

writer of this period/' furnish evidence of great 
learning, especially in the holy Scriptures. He 
was much engaged in controversy with the Do- 
natists and Pelagians. Augustine thus comments 
upon 1 Cor. vii, 14 : 

"For an unbelieving husband has been sanctified 
by his believing wife, and an unbelieving wife by her 
believing husband. 

"I suppose it had then happened that several 
wives had been brought to the faith by their believ- 
ing husbands, and husbands by their believing 
wives. And though he does not mention their 
names, yet he makes use of their example to con- 
firm his advice. 

"Else were your children unclean, but now are they 
holy. For there were then Christian infants that 
were sanctified; [or made holy; that is, that were 
baptized;] some by the authority of one of their 
parents, some by the consent of both; which would 
not be, if, as some of one party believed, the mar- 
riage was dissolved." (De Sermone Domini in 
Monte.) 

Again: "So that many persons, increasing in 
knowledge, after their baptism, and especially those 
who have been baptized either when they were 
infants, or when they were youths; as their under- 
standing is cleared and enlightened, and their 
inward man renewed day by day, do themselves de- 
ride, and with abhorrence and confession renounce 
their former opinions which they had of God, when 
they were imposed on by their imaginations. And 



330 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

yet they are not, therefore, accounted either not to 
have received baptism, or to have received a baptism 
of that nature their error was." (Wall, p. 251.) 

" And as the thief, who of necessity went with- 
out baptism, was saved, because by his piety he 
had it spiritually, so where baptism is had, though 
the party by necessity go without that [faith] which 
the thief had, yet he is saved ) which the whole 
body of the Church holds, as delivered to them, in 
the case of little infants baptized, who certainly 
can not yet believe with the heart to righteousness, 
or confess with the mouth to salvation, as the thief 
could, etc. . . . And if any one do ask for Divine 
authority in this matter, though that which the 
whole Church practices, and which has not been in- 
stituted by councils, but was ever in use, is very 
reasonably believed to be no other than a thing de- 
livered [or ordered] by an authority of the apostles, 
yet we may, besides, take a true estimate how much 
the sacrament of baptism does avail infants by the 
circumcision which God's former people received." 
(De Baptismo cont. Donatistas — Wall, p. 254.) 

" Therefore, as in Abraham the righteousness of 
faith went before, and circumcision, the seal of the 
righteousness of faith, came after, so in Cornelius 
[the centurion] the spiritual sanctification by the 
gift of the Holy Spirit went before, and the sacra- 
ment of regeneration by the laver of baptism came 
after; and as in Isaac, who was circumcised the 
eighth day, the seal of the righteousness of faith 
went before, and [as he was a follower of his father's 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 331 

faitli] the righteousness itself, the seal whereof had 
gone before in his infancy, came after, so in infants 
baptized the sacrament of regeneration goes before, 
and [if they put in practice the Christian religion] 
conversion of the heart, the mystery whereof went 
before in their body, came after. 

"And, as in that thief's case, what was wanting 
of the sacrament of baptism the mercy of the Al- 
mighty made up, because it was not of pride or 
contempt, but of necessity that it was wanting, so 
in infants that die after they are baptized, it is to 
be believed that the same grace of the Almighty 
does make up that defect, that by reason not of a 
wicked will, but of want of age, they can neither 
believe with the heart to righteousness, nor confess 
with the mouth unto salvation; so that when others 
answer for them, that they may have this sacrament 
given them, it is valid for their consecration, be- 
cause they can not answer for themselves ; but if 
for one that is able to answer for himself, another 
should answer, it would not be valid. 

"By all which it appears that the sacrament of 
baptism is one thing, and the conversion of the 
heart another; but that the salvation of a person 
is completed by both of them. And if one of these 
be wanting we are not to think that it follows that 
the other is wanting, since one may be without the 
other in an infant, and the other was without that 
in the thief, God Almighty making up both, in one 
and the other case, that which was not willfully 
wanting; but when either of them is willfully want- 



332 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

ing it involves the individual in guilt." (Fourth 
Book against the Donatists concerning Baptism.) 

(1.) The reader will observe that Augustin, like 
several others whom we have quoted, places baptism 
as a seal in the place of circumcision ; and so, in 
fact, did all the ancient fathers, so far as we have 
any knowledge. 

(2.) He declares the practice of baptizing in- 
fants, and the belief in its utility, to be universal 
in the Church in his time, which was but three 
hundred years from the apostles. He says "the 
universal Church practices it;" and who could 
have had a better opportunity of knowing ? 

(3.) He claims for it direct authority from the 
apostles. He says it was "not instituted by councils, 
but has always been observed, and is most justly be- 
lieved to be nothing else than a thing delivered by the 
authority of the apostles" 

Again, after quoting some passages out of St. 
Hierome on Iona relating to this subject, he pro- 
ceeds: 

"If we could with convenience come to ask that 
most learned man how many writers of Christian 
dissertations, and interpreters of holy Scripture in 
both languages could he recount who, from the time 
that Christ's Church has been founded, have held 
no otherwise, have received no other doctrine from 
their predecessors, nor left any other to their suc- 
cessors ? For my part — though my reading is much 
less than his — I do not remember that I ever heard 
any other thing from any Christian that received 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 333 

the Old and New Testament, neither from such as 
were of the Catholic Church, nor from such as be- 
longed to any sect or schism. I do not remember 
that I ever read otherwise in any writer that I could 
ever find treating of these matters, that followed 
the canonical Scriptures, or did mean or did pre- 
tend to do so." 

The above may be regarded as the combined tes- 
timony of two of the most learned, eminent, and 
influential fathers in the primitive Church, relative 
to the universal practice and faith of the Church 
from their time up to that of the apostles. No con- 
troversy, no denial of the right of infant baptism, was 
ever made, to the best of their knowledge, by any one 
man, or sect, or party of men. Tertullian and Greg- 
ory had, to be sure, just preceded them, as eminent 
fathers and ecclesiastical writers, with whom they 
must have been familiar; but even these fathers 
were not regarded by their cotemporaries, or suc- 
cessors, as being opposed to the baptism of infants. 
On what authority, then, is it said by Mr. Campbell 
that infant baptism u began to be practiced about 
the time of Tertullian and Origen ?" Certainly no 
authority for such a remark is found in any of the 
writings of the ancient fathers ; but all testify to 
the contrary who say any thing about it. 

11. Jerome, the cotemporary and friend of Au- 
gustine, says: 

"But he that is a child, and thinks as a child, his 
good deeds, as well as his evil deeds, are imputed 
to his parents; unless you will think the children 



334 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

of Christians are themselves only under the guilt 
of the sins if they do not receive baptism, and that 
the wickedness is not imputed to those also who 
would not give it them, especially at that time, 
when they that were to receive it could make no 
opposition against the receiving of it," etc. (Epis. 
ad Latam.— Wall, Vol. I, p. 240.) 

His meaning evidently is, that if children were 
not baptized their parents were guilty in conse- 
quence of the neglect. 

12. Councils of the Church. While we yield to 
Church councils no authority to institute, or abol- 
ish, or change Church ordinances, we may with 
safety look to them for testimony touching the prac- 
tices of the Church in the particular period which 
they represent. With this view, we refer to a 
council held at Carthage A. D. 397, where the fol- 
lowing was adopted as its forty-eighth canon : 

"In reference to the Donatists, it is resolved that 
we do ask the advice of our brethren and fellow- 
bishops, Ciricius and Simplicianus, concerning those 
only who are in infancy baptized among them, 
whether in that which they have not done with 
their own judgment, the error of their parents shall 
hinder them, that when they, by a wholesome pur- 
pose, shall be converted to the Church of God, they 
may not be promoted to be ministers of the holy 
altar." 

Four years after the above council, another was 
held at Carthage, when the following address, which 
clearly indicates to what conclusion they had arrived 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 335 

on the above subject, was delivered by Aurelius ; 
Bishop of that city : 

" You remember that in a former council, it was 
resolved that they who were, in their infancy, before 
they were able to understand the mischief of that 
error, baptized among the Donatists, and when 
they came to age of understanding, acknowledged 
the truth, etc., they were received by us. All will 
grant that such may, undoubtedly, be promoted to 
Church offices, especially in times of so great need/ 7 

At the fifth council, held in Carthage about A. D. 
400, the following was adopted as their sixth canon : 

"It is resolved, concerning infants of whose hav- 
ing been baptized there are no positive witnesses 
that can give certain evidence, and they themselves 
are not capable of giving any account of that sacra- 
ment having been administered to them, by reason 
of their age, that such be, without any scruple, 
baptized," etc. 

The only question was in reference to whether an 
individual that could give no positive evidence of 
being baptized in infancy, should, in adult years, 
be baptized? The answer was in the affirmative, 

13. Pelagius, the great opponent of original sin, 
and consequently of infant depravity, the author of 
the doctrine called Pelagianism, who lived and 
wrote in the forepart of the fourth century, in his 
famous letter to Innocent, Bishop of Home, says: 

"Men do slander me as if I denied the sacra- 
ment of baptism to infants." Again, he says: 
"That he never heard even an impious heretic who 



336 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

would affirm this concerning infants." And again 
lie says, " For who is so ignorant of the reading of 
the evangelists as to attempt — not to say to establish 
this — but to speak of it heedlessly, or even have 
such a thought ? In fine, who can be so impious 
as to hinder infants from being baptized and born 
again in Christ, and thus cause them to miss of 
the kingdom of heaven, since our Savior has said 
that none can enter into the kingdom of heaven 
that is not born again of water and the Holy Spirit ? 
"Who is there so impious as to refuse to an infant, 
of what age soever, the common redemption of 
mankind, and to hinder him that is born to an un- 
certain life from being born again to an everlasting 
and certain one?" 

"We beg the reader to pause," says Mr. Hibbard, 
"and consider that this man [Pelagius] who affirms 
his belief of infant baptism, and complains of be- 
ing slandered, when it is reported that he denies 
it — that declares he never heard of any person so 
impious, or so ignorant of the Gospel, not even 
among heretics, that presumed to deny the doc- 
trine or even call it in question — this very man, 
we say, would have found it greatly to his interest 
to have been able to cast discredit upon the prac- 
tice. Could he have proved that infant baptism 
was of human invention, or any thing short of apos- 
tolic authority, it would have made more in favor of 
his cause than almost any other argument he could 
have advanced." 

Again : " As Pelagius and Celestius denied 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 337 

original sin, it would seem that they would of course 
deny the necessity of infant baptism, for all the 
Christian world believed that baptism was 'for the 
remission of sins/ Infants, indeed, were not sup- 
posed to have any actual sin, but yet there was that 
liability to punishment, that unfitness for heaven, 
that, without the atonement of Christ, is an insep- 
arable property of our nature, and this the ancient 
Christian Church held was removed by or at bap- 
tism. A denial of the doctrine of this innate de- 
pravity, therefore, appeared to carry with it, neces- 
sarily, a denial of the fitness and obligation of infant 
baptism. And so it did. Accordingly, the great 
spirits in the Church who opposed Pelagius, ceased 
not to press him with this argument, c If infants are 
without fault in their nature, as you affirm, why, 
then, are they baptized V Now, any person can 
perceive how it became the interest of Pelagius to 
invalidate the practice and obligation of infant bap- 
tism, if he could." (Hibbard on Infant Baptism, 
p. 215.) 

And yet, such was his regard for truth, and such 
his convictions that the institution was apostolical, 
that, instead of attempting to deny that infants 
were to be baptized, he considered himself slandered 
because such an inference was attached to his doc- 
trine. 

14. Celestius, who, though he did not exactly 
agree with Pelagius, would have found it quite as 
convenient to have denied infant baptism if it could 
have been done in truth. He says: 
22 



838 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

"But we acknowledge infants ought to be bap- 
tized for the remission of sins, according to the rule 
of the universal Church, and according to the sen- 
tence of the Gospel, because our Lord has ordained 
that the kingdom of heaven shall be bestowed upon 
no person except he be baptized; which, as men do 
not receive it by nature, it is necessary to confer by 
the power of grace." 

Dr. "Wall, speaking of Pelagius and Celestius, 
makes the following true remarks : 

"If there had been any such Church of anti- 
pedobaptists in the world, these men could not have 
missed an opportunity of hearing of them, being so 
great travelers as they were. For they were born 
and bred, the one in Britain, the other in Ireland. 
They lived the prime of their age [a very long time, 
as St. Austin testifies] at Borne, a place to which 
all the people of the world had then a resort. They 
were both for some time at Carthage in Africa. 
Then the one [Pelagius] settled at Jerusalem, and 
the other [Celestius] traveled through all the noted 
Greek and eastern Churches, in Europe and Asia. 
It is impossible there should have been any Church 
that had any singular practice in this matter, but 
they must have heard of them. So that one may 
fairly conclude that there was not at this time, nor 
in the memory of the men of this time, any Chris- 
tian society that denied baptism to infants. This 
cuts off at once all the pretenses which some anti- 
pedobaptists would raise from certain probabilities, 
that the Novatians, or Donatists, or the British 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 339 

Church of those times, or any other whom Pelagius 
must needs have known, did deny it." (Wall's 
History of Infant Baptism, Part I, Chapter IX, 
Sec. 36.) 

15. A council held in Carthage A. D. 418, com- 
posed of two hundred and fourteen bishops, con- 
vened for the purpose of deciding certain points 
raised by the Pelagian controversy concerning 
infants, etc., decreed as follows : 

"Also, we determine that whosoever does deny 
that infants may be baptized when they come re- 
cently from their mother's womb; or does say that 
they are indeed baptized for the forgiveness of sins, 
and yet that they derive no original sin from Adam, 
[from whence it would follow that the form of bap- 
tism for forgiveness of sins is in them not true, but 
false,] let him be anathema." 

Now, if we add to the above the fact that Ireneus, 
Epiphanius, Philistrius, St. Austin, and Theodoret, 
all wrote histories of the origin and character of 
the different sects that separated from the apostolic 
Church, each tracing them down to their own time 
respectively, embracing in all a space of nearly five 
hundred years, and not one of them speaks of a 
single sect that discarded the doctrine of infant 
baptism, nor one that introduced it as an innovation 
upon the practices of the Church, the conclusion is 
almost irresistible, that, however much individuals 
and whole parties, large or small, differed upon other 
points, and however much they may have differed 
as to the design of the ordinance, yet all persons, 



840 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

parties, and sects, agreed in this point; namely, 
that the infant children of the Church should be 
baptized. 

16. Mr. John Paul Perrin, a descendant and his- 
torian of the Waldenses and Albigenses. The 
Waldenses, according to Mosheini, took their name 
and origin from Peter Waldus, a rich merchant of 
Lyons, in France, who commenced his reformation 
about the year A. D. 1160. 

"They accordingly," says Dr. Gregory, " formed 
religious assemblies, first in France, and afterward 
in Lombardy, whence they propagated their tenets 
throughout the other countries of Europe, with 
incredible rapidity, and with such invincible forti- 
tude that neither fire, nor sword, nor the most cruel 
inventions of merciless persecution, could damp 
their zeal, or entirely ruin their cause." (Gregory 
and Ruter's Church History, pp. 340, 341.) 

Among other slanderous reports raised by the 
Roman clergy against this remarkable people, was 
this, that they refused to baptize their children. 
Taking their report without investigating the facts 
in the case, anti-pedobaptists have claimed them as 
the propagators of their faith, and have claimed for 
them an antiquity almost apostolic, while they are 
their legitimate descendants. It was to disabuse his 
countrymen and kindred that Mr. Perrin wrote his 
history, gathering from their creeds, and other 
writings, their real sentiments. Mr. Perrin says : 
" The fourth calumny was touching baptism, which, 
it is said, they [Waldenses] denied to little infants, 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 341 

but from this imputation they quit themselves as 
followeth : The time and place of those that are to 
be baptized is not ordained, but the charity and ed- 
ification of the Church and congregation must serve 
for a rule therein, etc. ; and, therefore, they to whom 
the children were nearest allied, brought their 
infants to be baptized, as their parents, or any other 
whom &od hath made charitable in that kind." 
(Book I, Chap. IV, p. 15.) 

Again: "King Louis XII, having been informed 
by the enemies of the Waldenses, dwelling in Prov- 
ince, of many grievous crimes which were imposed 
[charged] upon them, sent to make inquisition in 
those places, the Lord Adam Fume, Maister of Be- 
quests, and a doctor of Sorborn, called Parne, who 
was his confessor. They visited all the parishes and 
temples, and found neither images nor so much as 
the least show of any ornaments belonging to their 
masses and ceremonies of the Church of Borne, 
much less any such crimes as were imposed 
[charged] upon them; but, rather, that they kept 
their Sabbaths duly, causing their children to be 
baptized according to the order of the primitive 
Church* teaching them the articles of the Chris- 
tian faith and the commandments of God." (Per- 
rin, Book I, Chap; VI, pp. 30, 31.) 

°Mr. Jones, an anti-pedobaptist historian of note, quotes the 
language of Perrin in the following way, leaving out children en- 
tirely: "On the contrary, they kept the Sabbath clay, observed the 
ordinance of laptism according to the primitive Church," etc. (His- 
tory, p. 352.) 



342 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Again, lie says: " Touching the matter of the 
sacraments, it hath been concluded by the holy 
Scriptures that we have two sacramental signs, the 
which Christ Jesus hath left unto us; the one is 
baptism, the other is the eucharist, which we re- 
ceive to show what our perseverance in the faith is, 
as we have promised when we were baptized, being 
little infants; as also in remembrance of that 
great benefit, which Jesus Christ hath done unto 
us, when he died for our redemption, washing us 
with his most precious blood. " (Confession of 
Faith, Art. XVII; Perrin, Book II, Chap. IY, pp. 
GO, 61.) 

He continues: "Among others there appeared a 
poor, simple, laboring man, whom the president 
commanded to cause his children to be rebaptized, 
which had lately been baptized by the minister of 
St. John, near Angrongue. This poor man re- 
quested so much respite as that he might pray unto 
God before he answered him, which being granted 
with some laughter, he fell down upon his knees in 
the presence of all that were there; and his prayer 
being ended, he said to the president that he would 
cause his child to be rebaptized, upon condition that 
the same president would discharge him by a bill 
signed with his own hand, of the sin which he 
should commit in causing it to be rebaptized, and 
bear one day before God the punishment and con- 
demnation which should befall him, taking this 
iniquity upon him and his; which the president 
understanding, he commanded him out of his 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 343 

presence, not pressing him any further." (Perrin, 
Book II, p. 64.) 

Doctrines of the Waldenses and ATbigenses y Book 
I, Chapter VI, p. 43 : "Now this baptism is visible 
and materiall, which maketh the partie neither good 
nor evill, as it appeareth in the Scripture by Simon 
Magus and Saint Paul. And whereas baptisme is 
administered in a full congregation of the faithfull, 
it is to the end that hee that is received into the 
Church shall be reputed and held of all for a Chris- 
tian brother, and that all the congregation might 
pray for him that he may be a Christian. And for 
this cause it is that we present our children in bap- 
tism, which they ought to doe to whom the chil- 
dren are nearest, as their parents, and they to whom 
God had given this charitie. 

" The things that are not necessary in the admin- 
istration of baptisme, are the exorcisms, breathings, 
the sign of the cross upon the forehead and breast 
of the infant, the salt put into his mouth, spittle 
into his ears and nostrills, the anoynting of the 
breast," etc. (Book III, Chap. IV, p. 99.) 

We have now a connected chain of testimony, 
extending from the apostles down to the twelfth 
century, showing that it was the universal practice 
of the Catholic Church, as well as of all the sects 
which were, from time to time, broken off from her 
communion to admit infant children into the Chris- 
tian Church by baptizing them. This fact is fur- 
ther established by the following statements by Dr. 
Wall: 



334 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

of Christians are themselves only under the guilt 
of the sins if they do not receive baptism, and that 
the wickedness is not imputed to those also who 
would not give it them, especially at that time, 
when they that were to receive it could make no 
opposition against the receiving of it/' etc. (Epis. 
ad Latam.— Wall, Yol. I, p. 240.) 

His meaning evidently is, that if children were 
not baptized their parents were guilty in conse- 
quence of the neglect. 

12. Councils of the Church. While we yield to 
Church councils no authority to institute, or abol- 
ish, or change Church ordinances, we may with 
safety look to them for testimony touching the prac- 
tices of the Church in the particular period which 
they represent. With this view, we refer to a 
council held at Carthage A. D. 397, where the fol- 
lowing was adopted as its forty-eighth canon : 

"In reference to the Donatists, it is resolved that 
we do ask the advice of our brethren and fellow- 
bishops, Ciricius and Simplicianus, concerning those 
only who are in infancy baptized among them, 
whether in that which they have not done with 
their own judgment, the error of their parents shall 
hinder them, that when they, by a wholesome pur- 
pose, shall be converted to the Church of God, they 
may not be promoted to be ministers of the holy 
altar/' 

Four years after the above council, another was 
held at Carthage, when the following address, which 
clearly indicates to what conclusion they had arrived 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 335 

on the above subject; was delivered by Aurelius ; 
Bishop of that city : 

" You remember that in a former council; it was 
resolved that they who were ; in their infancy; before 
they were able to understand the mischief of that 
error ; baptized among the DonatistS; and when 
they came to age of understanding; acknowledged 
the truth; etc.; they were received by us. Ail will 
grant that such may; undoubtedly; be promoted to 
Church offices; especially in times of so great need." 

At the fifth council; held in Carthage about A. D. 
400; the following was adopted as their sixth canon : 

"It is resolved; concerning infants of whose hav- 
ing been baptized there are no positive witnesses 
that can give certain evidence; and they themselves 
are not capable of giving any account of that sacra- 
ment having been administered to theni; by reason 
of their age ; that such be ; without any scruple; 
baptized;" etc. 

The only question was in reference to whether an 
individual that could give no positive evidence of 
being baptized in infancy, should; in adult years ; 
be baptized? The answer was in the affirmative, 

13. PelagiuS; the great opponent of original sir); 
and consequently of infant depravity; the author of 
the doctrine called Pelagianism, who lived and 
wrote in the forepart of the fourth century; in his 
famous letter to Innocent; Bishop of Borne; says: 

"Men do slander me as if I denied the sacra- 
ment of baptism to infants." Again ; he says: 
"That he never heard even an impious heretic who 



346 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

sires to know what have been the operations of the 
unhallowed alliance of Church and state, and of 
infant membership, the main pillar of it, had better 
make himself master of Italian, Spanish, and Portu- 
guese history; but to ascertain its operations at home 
we have documentary evidence enough to show that 
it tends rather to the carnalizing and secularizing: 

o O 

than to the purification or elevation of the Church's 
character. . . . How many baptized infidels are 
there in the bounds of all the pedobaptist commu- 
nities? Of the nominal members of the Christian 
profession, perhaps one half are the veriest sinners 
in Christendom. And does not pedobaptism claim 
its own children initiated and dedicated by this 
rite? Does she not claim them, I say, as members 
of her Churches 1" (Debate between Campbell and 
Rice, p.' 305.) 

We will try to analyze these statements of Mr. 
Campbell, and show their irrelevance to the subject 
now under discussion. 

I. He refers to the history of the Roman Catho- 
lic Church, especially in u Italy, Spain, and Portu- 
gal," to show the effect infant baptism, or as he is 
pleased to term it, " infant rantism," has upon the 
Church of Christ. 

The deep and wide-spread depravity of the 
Church of Rome, especially in those countries men- 
tioned, is fully admitted; but would it not be as ap- 
propriate to attribute all the immorality of the 
Romish Church to her erroneous views of the holy 
sacrament, or of the way sins were remitted, or to 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 347 

any other error in faith or practice, as to infant 
baptism? We confess her views of the nature of 
infant baptism at a very early period became erro- 
neous, which contributed to favor erroneous practi- 
ces, and thus to a general degeneracy of morals in 
the Church; but is it right to attribute all the 
wickedness of the Roman Church to this one ordi- 
nance, and that, too, without apprising the reader 
that the views of most Protestant denominations of 
Christians differ as widely from the Roman Church 
on this subject as he does himself? Nor are we 
disposed to adopt or advocate the peculiar doctrines 
or practices of any particular Protestant denomina- 
tion, not even our own; for it is the doctrine incul- 
cated, and the practices enjoined in the Holy Bible, 
that we would enforce on this s.ubject. We have 
not in these pages, and never shall while we have 
our senses, advocated the practices of the Romish 
Church, and of several prominent Protestant 
Churches, of retaining in their communion per- 
sons of immoral habits because they were baptized 
in infancy. If proper Church discipline is main- 
tained, the Church will be pure whether infants 
afe baptized or not; and if it is not maintained, 
the Church will degenerate with or without infant 
baptism. The purity of the Church depends upon 
her evangelical faith and holy spiritual attainments 
enjoined and maintained by a thorough discipline, 
and not upon the baptism of infants or the want of 
it. And we are, furthermore, of the opinion that 
if a strict and impartial investigation was made, 



348 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

facts would show that among Protestant denomina- 
tions pedobaptists are as pious, zealous, and moral, 
as their opponents, and yet all of them are suscep- 
tible of great improvement. The same argument, 
in all its bearings, might have been brought against 
the " Church in the wilderness," who also prac- 
ticed, from the days of Abraham, the induction of 
infants into the Church, and who also became at 
times very corrupt; but was their degeneracy at 
any time, by any of the holy prophets, or by Christ 
himself, or by any of his apostles, charged upon 
this one practice ? • No, never ! They were com- 
plained of frequently, and truly, for not having car- 
ried out the true spiritual import of the ordinance 
of initiation. 

1. They were required to " command their chil- 
dren," and their " households" after them, to "keep 
the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment;" 
and it was upon the fulfillment of these conditions 
that the Lord was to " bring upon Abraham that 
which he had spoken of him" concerning his seed. 
u And these words which I command thee this day, 
shall be in thy heart : and thou shalt teach them 
diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them 
when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou 
walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and 
when thou risest up." Deut. vi, 6, 7. The most 
"diligent" efforts were to be made to educate and 
train all their consecrated children in the knowledge 
of God's truth. They were also required to re- 
strain their children from vice. 1 Sam. iii, 13, 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 349 

And this legislation being made by the only power 
in the Church authorized to legislate, and made, 
too, under the proper constitution of the Church, 
with a knowledge of its provisions, and evidently to 
secure their accomplishment, are, unless repealed, 
still binding upon all who claim membership under 
the Abrahamic covenant in the Church of God; 
and instead of repealing these binding require- 
ments, the prophet Isaiah, looking directly to the 
new dispensation, said, "All thy children shall be 
taught of the Lord," or taught the knowledge of 
the Lord. JSTow, we have Divine authority for say- 
ing that God's great antidote for youthful depravity 
consists in the following particulars : 

(1.) Consecration to him in early infancy. 

(2.) Diligent instruction in Divine truth. 

(3.) Parental restraint from vice. 

And upon the fulfillment of these duties God has 
promised, in a very special and important sense, to 
" be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee ;" 
and he has also declared that children thus " trained 
up in the way which they should go, when they are 
old they will not depart from it." Now, all this 
was contemplated in the Abrahamic covenant, was 
implied in circumcision, and is now implied in in- 
fant baptism; but the Jews failed in a great degree 
to accomplish in behalf of their children what they 
had, from time to time, obligated themselves to do; 
and hence the depravity of many of their children. 
The same is true of the Roman Catholic Church, 
and of other Christian Churches, or of individual 



350 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

families in them. The wrong, therefore, consists 
not in baptizing infants, but in failing to educate 
and govern them. 

2. They were required to cut off from the congre- 
gation of Israel all who became wicked. "But the 
soul that doeth aught presumptuously, whether he he 
born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth 
the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from among 
his people. Because he hath despised the word of 
the Lord, and hath broken his commandment, that 
soul shall be utterly cut off; his iniquity shall be 
upon him." Numbers xv, 30, 31. 

If children who have been inducted into the 
Church in their infancy prove recreant to religion, 
and to morals in riper years, they should be expelled 
as other apostates are. No circumstance should 
prevent the execution of the above rule. In this 
the Jewish people utterly failed ; and so have the 
Romish Church; and Protestant Churches are some 
of them entirely too lax in this particular. It was, 
therefore, not for baptizing her infant children, at a 
time in which they were fit for a connection with 
the Church, but for retaining them in the Church 
when they were entirely unfit for that relation, that 
these Churches are severally to blame. 

II. Mr. Campbell asserts that " infant member- 
ship is the main pillar of the unhallowed alliance 
between Church and state." It is true that several 
Churches practicing the baptism of infants have 
also been allied to the state; and it is also true that 
various Churches practicing infant baptism have 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 351 

never formed any such alliance, and are as little in- 
clined to form such an alliance as their modest op- 
ponents are. We are, therefore, utterly unable to 
see the least evidence to support the above asser- 
tion, and are inclined to pronounce it false, and to 
attribute it, like many other things from the same 
source, to the prejudice of one hard up for both 
evidence and argument. Do you say that infant 
membership has a tendency to fill the Church with 
unconverted men, and these will aspire to places of 
honor and profit in the government, and will use 
the influence of the Church for that especial pur- 
pose, till the Church will become allied to the state ? 
We answer, that the best things G-od has ever given 
to man have been, and may again be abused, and 
real reformers will seek to bring back the Church 
to the proper use of the means of grace as divinely 
appointed, and not attempt their destruction on ac- 
count of the abuse they have suffered. 

Martin Luther, for instance, found the holy sacra- 
ment of the Lord's supper so perverted as to be 
rendered an occasion of great mischief to religion 
and to the Church. He did not, however, foolishly 
array himself against that Divinely-appointed insti- 
tution, and seek its overthrow on that account; but 
like a true friend to divine truth, he sought with 
all his might, and with wonderful success, to strip 
it of its Popish flummery which had been accumu- 
lating for ages. Now, if Mr. Campbell and his 
friends were seeking to remove from infant Church 
membership the many abuses it has suffered, and is 



352 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

now suffering, we would unite with him with all our 
might and soul; but to attempt to annihilate one 
of the most ancient, and when practiced according 
to its true Scriptural import, one of the divinely- 
appointed means of grace, we can but demur at so 
shocking a sacrilege. But instead of infant Church 
membership filling the Church with unconverted 
men, as is- alleged, if reduced to its original Scrip- 
tural design, it would have directly the opposite 
effect. Could Christian parents be brought to feel 
the amount and character of the obligations they 
assume in the baptism of their children, and could 
they be induced faithfully and fully to discharge 
these solemn duties, what a change would we see in 
a few years in the moral and religious aspects of 
Christendom ! What the Church needs is not 
tirades of invectives, or sneers, or caricatures of the 
ordinance, nor the magnifying of the evils growing 
out of erroneous views of the character of the in- 
stitution of infant baptism; but she needs light to 
make her duty plain, and pious zeal for God and for 
souls to produce necessary action, and with the 
blessing of high Heaven upon her efforts, Isaiah's 
prediction will soon receive its fulfillment: "And 
thy seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and 
their offspring among the people : all that see them 
shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed 
which the Lord hath blessed." Isaiah Ixi, 9. 

III. Mr. Campbell says " that it tends rather to 
the carnalizing and secularizing than to the purifi- 
cation or elevation of the Church's character/' 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 353 

What, consecrating a little infant to God, and 
bringing it within the embrace of the covenant of 
promise, teaching it diligently the truth of God, and 
restraining it from evil, have a H tendency rather to 
the carnalizing and secularizing" of the Church's 
character ! How could a statement be made farther 
from truth ? How different from this was the opin- 
ion of the pious Hannah of sacred memory, whose 
son Samuel was literally " given unto the Lord all 
the days of his life/' commencing with his birth, 
placing him in the temple under the instruction of 
Eli, that he might be thoroughly taught and trained 
to the service of God ! Nor was she disappointed 
in finding that all this " tended rather to the secu- 
larizing and carnalizing" of her son; for as " Sam- 
uel grew the Lord was with him ■ i till " Samuel was 
established to be a prophet of the Lord." 

In proof of his statement, Mr. Campbell adds, 
"How many baptized infidels are there in the 
bounds of all pedobaptist communities? Of the 
nominal members of the Christian profession, per- 
haps one half are the veriest sinners in Christen- 
dom." And is it not equally true that there are 
"many baptized infidels in the bounds of" anti- 
pedobaptist communities ? and as true of them, too, 
as of pedobaptist Churches, that "of the nominal 
members of the Christian profession, perhaps one 
half are the veriest sinners in Christendom ?" And 
what in their case shall we assign as the reason of 
this? Shall we attribute it to their practice of 
baptizing only by immersion? Smile not at the 
23 



354 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

prejudice that would make such an intimation; for 
it contains as much truth, and furnishes a conclu- 
sion as logically drawn from the premises, as does 
the assertion of Mr. Campbell, above quoted. 

The truth requires us to admit that apostasies do, 
and will occur, from any or all Christian Churches, 
no matter how perfect or apostolic the ordinances 
may be administered, without any particular blame 
being attached to the Church. We also are com- 
pelled, with great regret, to admit that many who 
are baptized in infancy are lost to the Church and 
to heaven forever, in consequence of the Church 
and of Christian parents neglecting to perform the 
duties they have so solemnly promised in baptism 
to perform to their children. And we again de- 
clare, that any well-directed effort to arouse the 
Christian Church to a proper sense and energetic 
practice of her duty in this matter, would receive 
our most hearty approval and zealous co-operation. 
But there is another aspect to this whole subject 
that we must not lose sight of; one, too, on which 
our opponents are not accustomed to look. 

1. How many millions of human beings are saved 
in heaven, and are now on their way thither, who 
will forever attribute their salvation to the intelli- 
gent and pious manner in which their godly parents 
carried out the vows, and performed the solemn ob- 
ligation, assumed by them in the baptism of their 
children in infancy ? This can only be fully seen 
at the judgment day. But why is it that our oppo- 
nents never look upon this bright side of the 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 855 

picture? and, consequently, never feel disposed to 
give any credit to infant baptism, as the agent of 
good to mankind? Every subject, it is said, has 
two sides, and good men will defer judgment till 
they have examined both, and will be as free to 
give credit in the one case as to attach blame in the 
other. Now, while it is true that there is a great 
amount of ignorance, ancl neglect of duty, and con- 
sequent apostasy and irreligion, and even infidelity 
in Christian communities who practice infant bap- 
tism, it is equally true that there is a great deal 
of enlightened zeal and pious effort to be found, 
together with glorious success, which may be traced 
directly and indirectly to infant baptism in pedo- 
baptist Churches. And the true way is, to hold 
fast to the good and correct the evil as speedily 
as possible. This, with the Divine blessing, we 
will do. 

2. But how much ignorance pervades all anti- 
pedobaptist Churches in relation to what is implied 
in infant baptism, generally supposing that it is 
merely a human superstitious practice ; and often, 
without a blush at their own ignorance, inquire, 
"What good will it do to sprinkle a little water 
upon the face of an infant V } And is not this igno- 
rance, to a great extent, occasioned by the manner 
in which their ministers preach and write on this 
subject? Instead of exciting the minds of parents 
to a careful investigation of the subject, calculated 
to unfold and impress duty, they seek to turn it into 
ridicule, and make it the subject of violent preju- 



856 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

dice. And how much of the indifference mani- 
fested by anti-pedobaptist Churches toward the 
religious instruction and restraining government of 
their children, can be traced to this conduct on the 
part of their spiritual guides, the judgment day 
alone can determine. If infant baptism is a Bible 
institution, what a fearful account will those minis- 
ters of the Gospel have to. render in the final judg- 
ment, who have devoted their eminent talents, 
learning, and influence, to bring it into disrepute 
with their people ! We verily believe that millions 
of little children are now suffering in morals and in 
their religious training, and many of them will suf- 
fer eternally in consequence of the neglect on the 
part of anti-pedobaptist ministers to enlighten their 
people, and to arouse them to duty in this respect. 
By this we do not mean to say that they are indif- 
ferent to the spiritual training of their children. 
No, it is far otherwise. We mean, however, to say, 
that they are not doing all they should do, and, 
especially, are neglecting and holding in ridicule 
one of the most useful and important means of 
grace and salvation for the young high Keaven has 
ever instituted, simply because it seems to conflict 
with their favorite dogma of u immersion the only 
mode of Christian baptism." 

IV. Mr. Campbell continues: "And does not 
pedobaptism claim its own children, initiated and 
dedicated by this rite? does she not claim them, 
I say, as members of her Churches?" Most cer- 
tainly they do, so long as they continue in a justi- 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 357 

fied relation to God, as they were when baptized. 
Christ claimed them as fit for his kingdom, and why 
should we not claim them for our Churches ? After 
they have forfeited their justification, they are no 
longer to be retained more than adult apostates. St. 
Paul says, " Now we command you, brethren, in the 
name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw 
from every brother that walketh disorderly/' 2 
Thess. iii, 6. But why does Mr. Campbell make this 
taunting inquiry? How often we hear it proclaimed 
from the pulpit and the press, that "pedobaptists 
will not commune with their own baptized mem- 
bers V 9 One minute they complain of those pedo- 
baptist communities or Churches who, like the Bo- 
roan Catholics, retain their baptized children, and 
commune with them, after they have become the 
"veriest sinners in all the land/' and attribute all 
the evil to their infant baptism, and the next min- 
ute they complain of those other pedobaptist 
Churches who do not retain their baptized children 
nor commune with them after they have become 
unfit for communion and fellowship; turning this 
fact, too, to the discredit of infant baptism: thus 
showing by their conduct that they are actuated by 
a blind and determined prejudice toward an insti- 
tution Divinely appointed, of ancient date, and of 
numberless blessings to the young. Mr. Campbell 
first refers us to Italy, Spain, and Portugal, to show 
the evil infant Church membership has produced in 
the Church ; and then, coming to our own country, 
where an entirely-different practice on this subject 



358 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

is known to prevail, he tauntingly inquires, "And 
does not pedobaptism claim its own children, initi- 
ated and dedicated by this rite J" He would, no 
doubt, rejoice to see us following the example of 
those countries and Churches of which he renders 
such hideous complaints, that the same might be 
applicable to us. 

Finally, it has not been our purpose in these 
pages to answer every caviling objection that is 
brought against infant Church membership, but to 
show its Scriptural authority, and to awaken atten- 
tion to the privileges it confers, and the solemn 
duties it enjoins; believing that the best argument 
against these objectors, is a practical demonstration 
of its utility by reducing to practice the original 
design of its great and glorious founder. 

"We therefore recommend the following important 
facts to the consideration of all believing parents, 
which we think have been fully developed in this 
work. 

1. It is your sacred and solemn duty to place your 
infant offspring under the shadowing wings of the 
everlasting covenant; induct them visibly into the 
Church of Jesus Christ, and consecrate them to the 
service and protection of the Almighty God of 
Abraham, that he may be a God unto them as he 
has promised to be. 

2. It is no less your duty to educate them relig- 
iously for God, exercising over them in their minor- 
ity the most vigilant watch-care, restraining them 
from all that is forbidden in the word of God ; in 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 359 

short, " train them up in the way in which they 
should go." We entreat you, as you regard the 
most solemn vow ever taken upon you before God, 
to do this. As you desire the salvation of those 
you love as your own life, fail not in this particular 
duty. As you desire your own acquittal before the 
tribunal of your final Judge, be not there found de- 
ficient in this duty. Better leave body and mind 
both unprovided for, than be deficient in the train- 
ing of the heart in the knowledge and love of 
divine truth. 

3. Such of them as manifest a due regard for 
their duty to God, and the salvation of their souls, 
should be kept within the pale of the Church, en- 
joying every means of grace and salvation, so be- 
nevolently furnished in the Gospel. By no means 
treat with lightness their early pretensions to piety. 
These are the lambs of the flock, which are entitled 
to the most tender and constant watch-care both of 
the Church and of the pastor. These are the 
u lambs " which Christ especially commanded Peter 
to "feed." 

4. Those of them that evince a contrary dispo- 
sition, become reckless in duty and in morals, 
should, in due time, after suitable labor has been 
bestowed, be "cut off" from Church privileges, as 
was commanded to Israel, the Church withdraiciiig 
fellowship, as St. Paul directs. The failure to do 
this is what has rendered infant baptism so odious 
in the eyes of so many professed Christians. Infant 
Church membership, thus reduced to its original 



360 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

design, will soon redeem itself, with the blessing of 
God, from all the aspersions cast upon it by its en- 
emies. 



SECTION XI. 

ADDRESS TO CHRISTIAN PARENTS IN BEHALF OF THEIR CHILDREN. 

Brethren beloved, in concluding the subject 
which has so long and so earnestly engrossed our 
attention, we beseech you to hearken briefly to the 
word of exhortation. If we have succeeded in con- 
vincing you that it is your duty to have your chil- 
dren baptized, you can not have failed to see the 
great responsibilities which you as parents must 
assume in the performance of this duty. In the 
faithful discharge of the duties subsequently in- 
volved, is to be found much of the benefits of 
the institution of infant baptism. And negligent 
as many Christians are in relation to the baptism 
of their children, it is to be lamented that a vastly- 
greater number are more criminally negligent in 
the performance of these subsequently-binding ob- 
ligations. Here, it is to be feared, are the most 
failures. 

I. Parents are apt to be too much engrossed in 
providing for the temporal wants and mental devel- 
opments of their children, to be able to give that 
attention to their spiritual training that the case 
imperiously demands. 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 361 

We would not knowingly undervalue or teach you 
to be indifferent to either of the above important 
interests. Convenient food and comfortable raiment 
they must have. Physical and mental development 
can not, without manifest injury, be dispensed with. 
But no one of these, nor all of them put together, 
bear any comparison to the proper religious culture 
of the mind and heart; consequently, if either 
must be neglected, or left but imperfectly accom- 
plished, let the failure fall any where, or even every- 
where, except upon the last-mentioned duty. We 
heartily commend to all concerned the following 
from the pen of the lamented Dr. Olin : 

"The duty of bestowing careful, timely culture 
upon infancy and childhood, is clearly indicated by 
their exceeding delicacy and susceptibility. Phys- 
ical developments will, indeed, proceed very well 
with only the slightest attention on the part of the 
parent, or with none at all. The nursery, the play- 
ground, the field, and the workshop, invite the 
bodily organs into due action, and impart vigor, 
skill, and activity. The intellect, too, however neg- 
lected by the teacher, imbibes knowledge from a 
thousand sources. Each of the senses becomes an 
inlet for valuable ideas. Business, social converse, 
human example, even inanimate nature, the sky, 
the air, and the earth, the elements in all their 
changes and activities, the vegetable kingdom; in 
a word, the visible world, and all that is, or is trans- 
acted in it, become sources of instruction, which 
freely tender their lessons to the opening mind in 



362 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

contact with them, and force their teachings upon 
it, in its most passive states, and even in spite of 
indifference or reluctance. From all this it occurs, 
that every human being who grows up in a civilized 
community attains a measure of intelligence suffi- 
cient for the common purposes of life — of the intel- 
ligence that guides the race in the satisfaction of 
its most pressing wants, and which must, on that 
account, rank high in comparison with that class of 
acquisition and accomplishments which we are wont 
to dignify with the name of education. Divine 
Providence has thus mercifully insured to the hu- 
man being such degrees of physical and mental de- 
velopment as are indispensable in the performance 
of those functions which pertain to self-preserva- 
tion, and on which society is dependent for its be- 
ing and material prosperity. For the higher culture, 
which gives the mind enlargement, and elevation, 
and refinement, and opens before it a career of 
worthy occupations and enjoyments, years of patient 
labor and assiduous teaching are requisite ; and par- 
ents are, unquestionably, bound by all the motives 
which duty and affection impose, to give to their 
offspring the best education which their providen- 
tial positions and circumstances will allow. With- 
out stopping to enforce, by argument or inculcation, 
one of the plainest and least controverted of duties, 
we proceed to add, that the highest of the parent's 
obligations finds its sphere in the moral and relig- 
ious training of his offspring. The superior import- 
ance of this department of education is sufficiently 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 363 

apparent, from the consideration already suggested, 
that while both the mind and the body, left to 
themselves, and wholly neglected by parent and 
teacher, spontaneously acquire, from their own ac- 
tivity, and from the business and conflicts of the 
world, the discipline, as well as the knowledge and 
skill, most valuable in the pursuits of after life, 
the moral susceptibilities, if neglected, are always 
perverted and corrupted. The most careful and un- 
remitted culture is requisite to preserve them from 
the most irreclaimable deterioration. They come 
to no good by any spontaneous, unguided efforts or 
essays of their own ; they will not remain in a state 
of embryo or torpor, till genial influences and a 
plastic hand woo and guide them into kindly mani- 
festations. To let the child alone, is to insure both 
precocity and proficiency in evil. It affords demon- 
strative evidence of the constitutional depravity of 
man, as well as of its universality, that early child- 
hood ever betrays a strong proclivity to wrong; that 
it never fails of growing up in sin, except under de- 
cided counteracting influences." (Methodist Quar- 
terly Review, Vol. I, fourth series, April No., pp. 
304,305.) 

If the Christian Church could generally view this 
subject in its true light, as described by the sainted 
Olin, and could be induced to act accordingly, to 
place the moral and religious training of their chil- 
dren above and in advance of every other interest, 
what a moral change a few years would bring over 
the Christian part of the world ! And yet all this 



364 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

was contemplated and enjoined by the great Head 
of the Church from the beginning, and made a part 
of the constitution of the Church, and is embraced 
in Christian baptism. Christian parent, how will 
the excuse you now render, that you have not time 
to attend to the religious culture of your children, 
appear in your final account ? — time to attend to all 
the less important duties of providing for their 
temporal wants, their physical developments, and 
mental culture, but no time to devote to an interest 
infinitely more important, the turning of the open- 
ing desire and expanding thought toward heaven, 
for the purpose of securing there an unfading crown 
of glory ! As you fear God, and value your soul, 
make no excuse now that will be unavailing then. 
Pray over this subject, and meditate upon it, till 
your hearts become as full of feeling and of desire 
in relation to it as they now are in reference to their 
temporal well-being, and time in abundance will be 
at your command. 

II. Parents complain that they are not competent 
to discharge the duties assumed by the baptism of 
their children, and, consequently, refuse to assume 
them. But the fact of incompetency has been dis- 
covered quite too late. The responsibility already 
exists. The fact that you have become a parent 
brings with it the responsibility. And having vol- 
untarily placed one's self in this condition, and then 
to refuse to recognize, or to assume, or to try to dis- 
charge, the duties implied in it, is adding sin to 
sin, and will render their account doubly fearful. 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 365 

How much, more of the spirit of the true Christian 
it would display, cheerfully to assume these respon- 
sibilities, and then try to the very best of their 
ability to discharge the duties implied, continually 
asking Divine aid to supply their lack both of wis- 
dom and strength! Many persons refuse to take 
upon themselves the profession of faith, in Christ, 
and plead, in justification of this criminal neglect, 
their inability to discharge the duties such a pro- 
fession imposes, and point to others whose failure 
has brought upon the cause much reproach, as an 
extenuation of their own guilt. But all this is sol- 
emn trifling with eternal things. Christ says truly, 
"If a man love me he will keep my words/ 7 as 
much those "words" which describe his duty to 
his children as to Christ, to the Church as well as 
to the world. His apostle, too, has said, "If any 
of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth 
to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall 
be given him." 

III. Parents are inclined to undervalue the im- 
portance of religious instruction, especially in early 
childhood. Christ said that "while men slept," an 
" enemy sowed tares." Never did he utter a truth 
more applicable than the above is to the case of 
children. Parents sleep away the very best season 
for religious culture. But Satan is up early. He 
knows the advantage of prepossessing the heart; 
hence his vigilance in exciting propensities to evil 
in early childhood. The wise man says, "In the 
morning sow thy seed j w referring, evidently, to early 



366 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

childhood, before Satan with his tares gains the 
prepossession of his heart, and surrounds it with 
evil influences, and before the winds of passion rise 
to scatter the good seed. A moment's reflection 
will convince any person that the first impressions 
made upon the mind of a child, are the most abid- 
ing. There is not a spot upon the green earth the 
geography of which a person will remember so well 
as the place where they first opened their little de- 
lighted eyes upon the beauties of nature. Every 
rock, and rill, and brook, and vale, and tree, and 
shrub, and blooming flower, are fresh in the man's 
memory till advanced old age, which clustered 
around and constituted the scenery of the first 
family homestead. The anecdotes and tales we first 
learned, the acquaintances and friendships we first 
formed, the books we first read and learned, have 
outlived in our heart's memory a thousand later ones 
of more importance to us. And the writer of this 
knows well a minister of the Gospel of many years' 
standing, who, though he has forgotten many a val- 
uable sermon which cost him days of hard labor, 
retains distinctly and vividly in his heart's memory 
the first time he heard from the lips of a pious 
mother that there was such a place as heaven. Nor 
will the cares of this life, nor the duration of the 
next, erase from that memory the impressions then 
formed, or the desire to live in heaven then created. 
Call it child's play if you choose, eternity will reveal 
the stubborn fact that by far the greatest number 
that reach heaven heard of that place, and formed 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 367 

favorable purposes in relation to it, as the mind was 
just emerging from a state of infancy. On this 
point Dr. Olin again remarks : 

"This susceptibility to both moral and demoral- 
izing influences, exists to an extent, and at an age, 
little suspected by inattentive observers. We give 
no countenance to the extravagant speculations of 
those who teach us that the character of the man, 
both moral and mental, is fixed in infancy, even an- 
terior to the clear dawn of reason; but we think it 
demonstrable that the bias which shapes our earthly 
and eternal destinies is usually received in early 
childhood. This is the obvious teaching of the 
holy Scriptures; and all careful observation goes to 
confirm it. The mind at that early period is ex- 
quisitely sensible to moral impressions. The deli- 
cate surfaces on which the daguerreotype so exactly 
portrays the human countenance, with no pencil or 
colors but reflected sunbeams, are not half so im- 
pressible as the unsophisticated spirit of childhood. 
The mind at that tender age is not only open to 
all influences, good and bad, but it spontaneously 
invites them to write upon its expanding capacities 
their own image and superscription. It longs for 
impressions, as the parched cornfield for genial 
showers. It spreads out its tender leaves to receive 
them, as the green plant to the dews of heaven/' 
(Methodist Quarterly Review, fourth series, Yol. I, 
p. 305.) 

IV. Some parents will say that we are imposing 
too much upon them; we are ascribing too much to 



368 INFANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

a feeble human agency. They are expecting God, 
in his own time, in answer to prayer, to convict their 
children of sin, convert them to himself, and bring 
them to heaven. But are there not appointed means 
to be used beside prayer? And are we not pre- 
sumptuous in looking for the end without the use 
of the means? "This objection fails to compre- 
hend our meaning. We devoutly ascribe all effi- 
ciency to God, and only claim for human agency 
such power as the divine grace imparts to it. Let 
us seek the light of an analogy. Children do ap- 
parently, and in so far as we can perceive, derive 
life and being from their parents alone; and yet we 
know that God claims life and being as his special 
gifts and peculiar prerogatives. No intelligent 
Christian is ever puzzled or scandalized by such dif- 
ficulties. They find their solution in this truism: 
Man is the acting, God the efficient cause. So of 
the case under consideration. The right training 
and godly nurture which insure piety in our chil- 
dren are the parents' duty and work; but they only 
produce this spiritual result because God wills it 
and works it in this particular way." (Methodist 
Quarterly Review, fourth series, Vol. I, p. 311.) 

The same author again says: "It is, beyond all 
question, the will of Christ that the children of 
Christian parents should themselves become Chris- 
tians. It is remarkable that all the promises of God 
to his people are formally and avowedly extended to 
their children as well as themselves. This was a 
fundamental idea in his covenant with Abraham : 



RIGHT TO THE COVENANT TOKEN. 369 

'I will establish my covenant between me and thee, 
and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an 
everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to 
thy seed after thee/ . . . The same principle reap- 
pears in the Mosaic dispensation; and so entire was 
God's reliance upon the children to fill up the ranks 
of the Jewish Church, that, while proselytes from 
the heathen were not rejected, no provision was 
made for replenishing it from any foreign source. 
The prophetic promises guarantee the same high 
privilege to the children of pious parents under the 
Christian dispensation: 'The promise is unto you 
and your children / 'I will pour out my Spirit upon 
all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall 
prophesy/ Indignant that any should pretend to 
doubt or limit the plenitude of his grace toward 
those who were yet unstained by transgression, 
Christ rebuked the narrow faith of his disciples, 
and bade them 'suffer little children to come unto 
him/ because 'of such is the kingdom of heaven/ 
Whoever might reject them, as incapable or un- 
worthy of the Christian dignity, he whose own child- 
hood i increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor 
with God and man/ had resolved to perfect praise 
'out of the mouths of babes and sucklings/ To 
children the apostles, now better taught than before 
in the mysteries of their Master's large compassion, 
freely extended the rite of baptism, the sign and 
the seal of the acceptance and sanctification to which 
they conceded to them a recognized title, as part 
and parcel of those believing ' households ' which 
24 



370 INEANT CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

so early became the nucleus and model of the 
Churches of the living God. The children of 
Christian parents were thus openly and explicitly 
recognized as members of the apostolic Church. . . . 
To this end he intends the Christian family to be a 
school of Christ — to live in a holy atmosphere, in 
which the children shall be bathed, and baptized, 
and nurtured as in a divine, genial element. He 
would have them put on the Lord Jesus Christ with 
the first garments of their childhood, and drink in 
Christian sentiments from the mother's loving, 
beaming eyes, as they hang upon the breast. He 
intends them to learn religion, as they learn a thou- 
sand other things, from the spirit and tone of the 
family; from its vocal thanksgivings and songs of 
praise; from its quiet, joyous Sabbaths; from the 
penitent tear, the humble carriage, the tender ac- 
cents, the reverent look and attitude of the father, 
when, as a priest, he offers the morning and evening 
sacrifice." (Methodist Quarterly Review, fourth 
series, Vol. I, pp. 308, 309.) 

Christian parent, cease that skeptical inquiry, 
"What good will it do?" Remember, for your en- 
couragement, that God hath said, "He that goeth 
forth, and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall 
doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his 
sheaves with him." God grant to each reader of 
this an abundant harvest ! 

THE END. 



6«/ 



